Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Bury and District Joint Water Board Bill [Lords],

Read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

London County Council (Money) Bill (by Order),

Second Reading deferred till Monday next, at half-past Seven of the clock.

OFFENCES RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLES.

Address for
Return showing the number of Offences relating to Motor Vehicles in England and Wales, together with the results of the proceedings in courts of summary jurisdiction and the number of persons cautioned or prosecuted for such offences during the year ended the 31st day of December, 1934 (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 84, of Session 1933–34).—[Captain, Crookshank.]

Oral Answers to Questions — AIR ATTACK (PROTECTION).

Mr. DOBBIE: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the text of any communication sent to local authorities regarding the measures to be taken to protect the civil population from aerial attack?

The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT(Sir John Gilmour): It is my intention that the general circular to local authorities now in course of preparation should be placed on sale after it has been issued, and the same course would probably be followed with any subsequent communications to local authorities which were of a general
nature. I believe that this will be a more appropriate method of securing the publicity for these documents which the hon. Member appears to desire, than his suggestion that they should be published in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman from whom he expects an aerial attack?

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE.

Mr. MANDER: 1.
asked the Minister of Labour whether it is proposed to submit the new regulations of the Unemployment Assistance Board before the House adjourns for the summer Recess, or to continue the stand-still arrangement indefinitely; and whether the Board has submitted new regulations, officially or unofficially?

The MINISTER of LABOUR(Mr.Oliver anley): I would refer the hon. Member to the replies given by my hon. Friend to the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. K. Lindsay) on 22nd May, to which at present I have nothing to add.

Mr. GEORGE HALL: 6.
asked the Minister of Labour the weekly cost of assistance under the Unemployment Assistance Board in Glamorganshire and Monmouthshire since 7th January last to the latest available date; and the estimated weekly cost caused by the standstill arrangement?

Mr. STANLEY: I will publish the information for which the hon. Member asks in the first part of the question in the OFFICIAL REPORT as soon as it can be extracted from the records, but I would remind him of the reply to his question on 21st February last. I regret that the information for which he asks in the second part of the question is not available.

Mr. HALL: Surely, the right hon. Gentleman has in his possession information which would enable him to make some estimate of the cost?

Mr. STANLEY: The hon. Member will appreciate that an estimate can only
be arrived at by means of samples, and, although by that means we can arrive at a reliable figure for the country as a whole, I could not guarantee the reliability of a figure for a particular district. It might be that the samples in that district were not wide enough to make the estimate reliable.

Mr. HALL: 7.
asked the Minister of Labour the amount paid in Glamorganshire and Monmouthshire as retrospective payment as the result of the standstill arrangement under which the Unemployment Assistance Board regulations were suspended; and the amounts for each county separately

Mr. STANLEY: The amounts paid in respect of "arrears" of unemployment assistance allowances under the provisions of the Unemployment Assistance (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1935, were about £14,250 in Glamorganshire and £3,950 in Monmouthshire.

EXCHANGES (PLACING WORK).

Mr. LAWSON: 4.
asked the Minister of Labour what steps are taken to make known the placing work of the Ministry

Number of Unemployed Persons on the registers of the undermentioned Employment Exchanges.


Date.
Neath.
Pontardawe.



Wholly Unemployed.
Temporarily stopped.
Wholly Unemployed.
Temporarily stopped.


24th April, 1933
…
…
…
3,185
3,053
556
880

23rd April, 1934
…
…
…
3,645
3,082
677
539

15th April, 1935
…
…
…
3,231
3,887
640
861

Mr. G. HALL: 8.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of persons in receipt of transitional benefit, with the amount of benefit paid for each week in November and December of last year; and will he give the number of persons in receipt of assistance, together with the amount paid 'by the Unemployment Assistance Board, for each week since 7th January of this year

of Labour through the exchanges; and whether he proposes to take any further steps to give publicity to this part of the work of the Department?

Mr. STANLEY: The ordinary methods of publicity have been by means of posters and leaflets and by arranging for stands at the Industries Fairs and the various national and local shows. Steps have recently been taken with the object of making this publicity more effective, and in particular to provide one or two films for public exhibition illustrating the work of the Department. I am arranging for a few of the more recent posters and leaflets to be shown in the Tea Room.

STATISTICS.

Sir WILLIAM JENKINS: 2.
asked the Minister of Labour the number totally unemployed and the number partially unemployed in the Neath area and the number in the Pontardawe area for 1933, 1934, and the last available date in 1935?

Mr. STANLEY: As the reply includes a table of figures, I will, if I may, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the statement:

Mr. STANLEY: As the reply includes a table of figures, I will, if I may, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the reply:

The following table sets out approximately the number of persons to whom transitional payments and unemployment allowances were paid and the amount of such payments in each week from the beginning of November, 1934, to 18th May, 1935:

Week Ended.
Number of Persons Paid.
Amount Paid.


1934.

£


3rd November
723,945
791,820


10th November
726,603
790,482


17th November
723,861
792,039

24th November
723,440
790,147

1st December
721,521
789,856


.8th December
719,218
788,209


15th December
720,034
789,221


Two weeks ended 29th December.
1,425,776
1,551,383


1935.




5th January
735,301
813,492

12th January
732,945
804,802


19th January
727,695
797,804


26th January
724,400
790,862


2nd February
716,761
781,315


9th February
710,975
778,417


16th February
731,341
918,595*


23rd February
731,083
835,783


2nd March
732,922
838,076

9th March
736,614
843,564


16th March
734,984
843,797


23rd March
731,021
839,441

30th March
728,045
834,932


6th April
723,657
830,315


13th April
724,344
832,211


Two weeks ended 27th April.
1,446,551
1,673,182

Two weeks ended 11th May.
1,447,721
1,792,916


18th May
726,343
834,307


* The payments in this week included arrears which became due under the Unemployment Assistance (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1935.


From the first appointed day there wasagradual transfer of transitional payment cases to assistance determinations and no distinction was drawn in the accounts according to whether cases had or had not been transferred.

YOUNG PERSONS (INSURANCE).

Mr. LAWSON: 5.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he has received a report from the Unemployment Insurance Statutory Committee on the subject of excepting from the scope of the unemployment insurance scheme persons under 16 employed to an inconsiderable extent in what would otherwise be insurable work; and, if so, what action he proposes to take?

Mr. STANLEY: I have received a report, which I propose to publish immediately, in which the Committee recommend that the provisional regulations on this subject, which expire on 7th June
next, should not be made permanent. I have decided to accept this recommendation. Unemployment insurance contributions will accordingly be payable on and after 8th June, 1935, in respect of persons under 16 in the cases which have hitherto been excepted from insurance by those regulations. In order that persons interested might have as much notice of the position as possible, I issued a notice to this effect last week-end. The Committee's report also discusses the lines along which, in the view of the Committee, regulations should be made dealing with the inconsiderable employment of persons aged 16 and over. Draft regulations on this subject will be submitted to the Committee in due course.

Mr. LAWSON: Do I understand that the report is to be published?

Mr. STANLEY:: Yes.

Mr. LAWSON: Shall we be able to get it through the Vote Office in the ordinary way?

Mr. STANLEY: I will look into that point.

Oral Answers to Questions — PUBLIC HEALTH.

VACCINATION.

Mr. GROVES: asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the statement of a magistrate at a meeting of the Devon Public Health Committee, on 3rd April, that unless he was really satisfied that the parents were conscientious objectors to vaccination he refused to sign; and whether he will call the attention of magistrates to the fact that they have no right to inquire into the validity of the grounds of objection to vaccination on the part of parents making statutory declarations under the Vaccination Act, 1907?

Sir J.GILM0UR: My attention had not previously been called to this statement. If the hon. Member will send me full particulars, I will inquire into the matter.

ANTHRAX.

Mr. RHYS DAVI ES: 11.
asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the recent deaths from anthrax at Chester and Hull; and, if so, whether it is possible to take greater precautions at the ports to prevent the spread of this disease?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Yes, Sir, but I am afraid that the information at present available in these two cases does not suggest any further precaution which could have been taken at the ports. In neither case has it been possible so far to establish the source of infection.

Mr. DAVIES: Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with the precautions that are taken at the ports?

Sir J.GILMOUR: Nobody can be entirely satisfied with regulations, but, as I have said, we are making further inquiries, and, until I know the result of those inquiries, I cannot say any more.

MILK TREATMENT.

Brigadier - General CLIFTON BROWN: 25.
asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been drawn to a, report of the Danish State dairies on the system of stassanisation of milk as a more thorough and economic way of milk treatment than pasteurisation; and whether he will have inquiry made into this treatment?

The MINISTER of HEALTH (Sir Hilton Young): I am aware of the report referred to by my hon. and gallant Friend. Stassanisation is a continuous flow process for the heat treatment of milk, and I am advised that pasteurisation by the holding process efficiently operated gives a greater assurance of the complete destruction of pathogenic bacteria than continuous flow processes.

WATER SUPPLY (LANCASHIRE AND CHESHIRE).

Mr. CHORLTON: 21.
asked the Minister of Health how the work of the advisory water supply committees in Lancashire and Cheshire is progressing, how many meetings have been held, and whether any proposals have been submitted to him?

Sir H. YOUNG: The two new committees have met once and have appointed sub-committees who are investigating needs and resources. This will necessarily involve much work and take time. The South-West Lancashire Committee have completed their survey and find that the time has not yet arrived for the provision of additional resources for their region. It has not therefore been necessary to submit proposals to me. I keep in close touch with
the proceedings of all the Regional Committees.

Mr. CHORLTON: asked the Minister of Health whether the consultative committee proposed to co-ordinate the work of the water advisory committees in Lancashire and Cheshire has yet been set up; and, if not, when will it be?

Sir H. YOUNG: It is not proposed for the present to set up any formal consultative committee. The question will be considered by the regional committees when the need arises.

EGGS.

Mr. GLOSSOP: 23.
asked the Minister of Health what evidence is in the possession of his Department to the effect that the content of the egg is not affected by what the hen eats?

Sir H. YOUNG: I am advised that there is no evidence of any bacterial infection of eggs being caused by the food eaten by the hen.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Has my right hon. Friend ever tasted the eggs of a duck that wades along the seashore, and has he noticed their fishy, seaweedy flavour? Is there any difference between a hen and a duck?

Mr. GLOSSOP: 24.
asked the Minister of Health whether he has considered the reports of several public analysts, to which his attention has been drawn, to the effect that sulphurous acid is being used as a preservative for liquid eggs imported into this country; and what action he intends to take to put an end to this practice?

Sir H. YOUNG: I have recently received a document in which it is stated that one public analyst has found sulphurous acid in a sample of imported liquid eggs. The enforcement of the preservatives regulations is a matter for the appropriate local authorities, but I am making inquiries with regard to this case.

WOMEN LABOUR (INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS).

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: 12.
asked the Home Secretary whether the Government propose to ratify the international labour conventions as to the employment
of women during the night, the regulation of hours in automatic sheet-glass works, and workmen's compensation for occupational diseases, which were adopted by the International Labour Conference last year?

Sir J. GILM0UR: Yes, Sir, subject as regards the two first Conventions to the necessary legislation being passed by Parliament.

SUNDAY ENTERTAINMENTS ACT.

Mr. LECKIE: 13.
asked the Home Secretary the amount levied upon the cinema trade by the London County Council and paid to charity for the preferential right to trade on Sundays for the three years prior to the passing of the Sunday Entertainments Act, 1932; and also the amount levied and paid for the three years since the Act became law?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I have been supplied by the London County Council with certain figures, which I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following are the figures:

Before the entry into force on 20th November, 1932, of the Sunday Entertainments Act,1932.

1930 till 4th December; at the rate of £145,000 a year (estimated).

4th December, 1930–20th November, 1932; at the rate of
£134,000 a year (estimated).

After the entry into force of the Act.

£


20th November—31st December,1932
9,003


1933
85,689


1934
95,845


1935 (first quarter)
35,040

INDUSTRIAL DISEASE (COTTON INDUSTRY).

Mr. SUTCLIFFE: 14.
asked the Home Secretary what progress has been made by the conference of representatives of employers and employés with regard to the provision of compensation in the event of damage to lungs caused by dust in card rooms in the cotton industry?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I am informed that, after some preliminary discussions as to how best to deal with the matter, both
sides are now seeking certain further information with a view to discovering whether it provides a basis for a practical scheme.

EDUCATION (TEACHERS).

Sir PERCY HARRIS: 17.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education how many teachers who have retired since the economy cuts have, as a result, received reduced pension rates; whether any estimate has been made as to the total amount of the loss it is likely to entail to the teachers concerned; and whether it is proposed to make up to them any part of this loss?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION(Mr. Ramsbotham): Up to the 31st March, 1935, about 10,000 teachers have retired since the date of the reduction in salary, and have as a result received pension at reduced rates. It is estimated that the loss in annual payments is approximately £57,000, in addition to a loss in lump sums. The loss by these teachers in annual pensions would have continued at the rate of about 4348,000 a year, diminishing with the deaths of the pensioners, but the Government's proposal will reduce this annual loss by about 50 per cent. as from the 1st July of this year, in addition to reducing the similar losses of approximately 25,000 teachers who may be expected to retire between the 31st March, 1935, and the 1st July, 1940.

Sir P. HARRIS: 18.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education whether he can give any estimate as to the number of certificated teachers seeking employment in elementary schools who are out of work; and whether he can hold out any prospect of any considerable proportion of them receiving an opportunity of employment by local education authorities?

Mr. RAMSBOTHAM: My information is that, out of 16,063 teachers who left the training colleges in July, 1933 and 1934, there were 1,960 who up to January last had not obtained teaching posts, but this figure includes a considerable number of students who had failed to pass their final examinations, as well as a number who for some reason or other were not immediately seeking employment in the teaching profession. Since
January many of these young teachers will, of course, have obtained posts. I have no reason to believe that there is an appreciable amount of unemployment among certificated teachers after they have obtained their first post, but the Board have no means of ascertaining how many teachers are definitely seeking employment. As regards the last part of the question, I should explain that the proportion of certificated teachers in the teaching service has been steadily increasing of recent years. There are more certificated teachers in the profession than ever before.

Sir P. HARRIS: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is alleged that there are some 600 teachers in London who are on the official list as not being able to obtain employment; and does he realise what a serious thing this is for them, as they are not covered in any way by unemployment insurance and they are walking about the streets unable to find any kind of alternative work, having received no training suitable for any of the other jobs that are available?

Mr. RAMSBOTHAM: I understand that the hon. Baronet is referring to what are called supply teachers. I have no official figures as to their number, but probably a proportion of them have part-time occupation in other directions.

Sir P. HARRIS: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, owing to the decrease in the number of children in the schools, there has been a decrease in the demand in the Metroplitan area for supply teachers, which is the main cause of the trouble?

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Are the Board using their influence with local education committees with a view to reducing the size of the classes and thereby absorbing unemployed teachers?

Mr. RAMSBOTHAM: The size of the classes is being steadily reduced.

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that teachers with higher qualifications are left without employment in some cases because the less qualified teachers are cheaper for.the local authorities?

Mr. RAM SBOTHAM: I have pointed out that the proportion of certificated teachers is going up steadily.

NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE.

Mr. SUTCLIFFE: 29.
asked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the National Health Insurance Bill now before the House, he intends to make known to each one of the 200,000 persons affected thereby exactly what is proposed; and, if so, what steps to that end are being taken?

Sir H. YOUNG: Considerable publicity has been given through the Press and otherwise to the proposals contained in the Bill now before the House, and in particular I am satisfied that they are now well known to approved societies, through whom the insured persons affected can obtain information with regard to the proposals. In the event of the Bill becoming law steps will be taken to ensure that its provisions are made known by the approved societies to all the insured persons concerned.

Mr. CAPORN: Will my right hon. Friend consider whether it will be possible to make that information available at the employment exchanges, so as to give wider publicity to it?

Sir H. YOUNG: I will certainly take all suggestions into consideration, but, as a matter of fact, the organisation in these matters of approved societies is so very efficient that I doubt whether any other steps are needed.

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: Is it not a fact that the approved societies do this automatically?

Sir H. YOUNG: That is really rather the effect of my previous reply. The organisation is extremely efficient for the purpose referred to.

Mr. LAWSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that people have suffered sufficiently under the 1932 Act that they ought to understand the mind of the Government?

Mr. DAVID GRENFELL: asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that there is no representative of Wales on the consultative council under the National Health Insurance Act; and whether, in view of the special position obtainig in Wales owing to unemployment and trade depression, he will authorise the appointment of at least one qualified person from Wales to assist in the work in the council?

Sir H.YOUNG.: G: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave on the 13th December last to the hon. Member for Flintshire (Mr. Llewellyn-Jones). I 'would add that among the many members of the council who are associated 'with approved societies carrying on business in Wales is one who is resident in the Principality, has for many years taken a prominent part in the administration of national health insurance in Wales and is clerk to a Welsh insurance committee.

Mr. GRENFELL: Does he not occupy a semi-official position and is therefore not in a position, as a representative should be, freely to express Ms opinion to the Department or anywhere else?

Sir H. YOUNG: I do not think that that is a necessary consequence at all, but is rather a matter of argument.

Mr. GRENFELL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction in Wales owing to the absence of a Welsh representative; and is there any good reason why a representative from Wales should not be

Authority.
Annual Instalment repayble.
Annual repayment expressed in terms of rate poundage in 1934–35.
Total amounts outstanding.






£
s.
d.
d.
£
s.
d.


Barnsley C.B.C.
…
…
…
2,829
10
8
2.18
28,295
6
8


Barrow-in-Furness C.B.C.
…
…
…
12,055
19
3
9.29
120,559
12
6


Brecon C.C.
…
…
…
5,089
18
8
4.84
50,899
6
5


Derby C.C.
…
…
…
866
18
8
0.08
8,669
6
8

Durham C.C.
…
…
…
32,850
9
1
2.72
328,504
11
0


East Ham C.B.C.
…
…
…
20,238
0
4
6.54
202,380
3
2

Essex C.C.
…
…
…
49,285
18
4
1.48
492,859
2
10

Gateshead C.B.C.
…
…
…
4,244
1
4
2.02
42,440
13
4

Glamorgan C.C.
…
…
…
35,313
7
9
3.46
353,133
17
3

London C.C.
…
…
…
16,700
0
0
0.07
167,000
0
0


Merthyr Tydfil C.B.C.
…
…
…
7,324
0
0
8.72
73,240
0
0

Monmouth C.C.
…
…
…
40,525
10
7
9.68
405,255
5
10


Sheffield C.B.C.
…
…
…
60,809
1
6
5.33
608,090
14
6


South Shields C.B.C.
…
…
…
3,175
18
8
1.62
31,759
6
8


West Ham.B.C.
…
…
…
41,371
19
1
6.98
413,719
10
4


Yorks West Riding C.C.
…
…
…
8,163
16
0
0.30
81,638
0
0



£3,408,444
17
2

CONTRIBUTORY PENSIONS ACT.

Mr. BATEY: 28.
asked the Minister of Health whether, from 1st January, 1936, when an increase of contributions of 2d. for men and Id. for women per week

selected on equal terms with the representative of England?

Sir H. YOUNG: No, Sir, I am not aware of any dissatisfaction of that sort, but, if the hon. Member has any representations he desires to bring to my attention, I shall always, of course, be most willing to consider them.

LOCAL AUTHORITIES (GOSCHEN LOANS).

Sir W. JENKINS: 19 and 20.
asked the Minister of Health (1) what is the annual instalment of repayment of the Goschen loan for each authority separately; and what it means to them in rate poundage per annum;
(2) what is the total amount of the outstanding Goschen loans with all the authorities in England and Wales, giving the amounts outstanding with each authority?

Sir H. YOUNG: As the answer contains a number of figures, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

takes effect to the Widows', Orphans', and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act, such increase will be divided, one half to be paid by employers and one half by the contributors?

Sir H. YOUNG: I would refer the hon. Member to Clause 19 of the National Health Insurance and Contributory Pensions Bill, and to paragraph 22 of the Explanatory Memorandum (Cmd. 4905), which show how it is proposed to deal with this matter.

Mr. BATEY: Cannot the Minister say just what will be done rather than give an answer like that; will he tell us what steps he proposes to take in order that employers and employed may know that this increase of contributions takes place after the 31st December?

Sir H. YOUNG: The hon. Member will find another question down on the Order Paper.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL AIR FORCE.

CONSTRUCTION- PROFITS.

Mr. MANDER: 31.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider the advisability of incorporating in the present Finance Bill a provision enabling an excess profit duty or some similar tax to be imposed upon aeroplane manufacturers?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Chamberlain): I do not propose to introduce such a provision into the present Finance Bill, but I would refer the hon. Member to the passage relating to this subject in the speech of my right hon. Friend the Lord President in the House of Commons on the 22nd May last.

Mr. MANDER: Is it not proposed to take advantage of the Finance Bill to deal with this question in any manner?

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Will not my right hon. Friend apologise to these aeroplane manufacturers for not having employed them at least a couple of years ago; and is he aware that if it were not for representations such as those of the hon. Gentleman who put the question it would have been done?

RE-ENGAGEMENTS.

Miss WARD: 65.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether, in view of the Government's policy to increase the personnel of the Royal Air Force, it is still the intention of the Air Ministry to re-engage only a limited
number of airmen to complete time for pension?

Sir VICTOIR WARRENDER(Comptroller of the Household): I have been asked to reply. The opportunities that can be offered to airmen to re-engage to complete 24 years' service for pension are limited by the anticipated vacancies in supervisory posts, in non-commissioned and warrant ranks, but a substantial increase in the number of such re-engagements is being granted. I should make it clear that all suitable skilled men (i.e., tradesmen in trade groups other than Group V) are being invited to extend their service for periods up to four years.

OFFICERS AND AIRMEN (EMPLOYMENT AND REENLISTMENT).

Mr. HASLAM: 67.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether, in view of their technical experience, he will give special consideration to those officers and men who have in the last few years taken their discharge from the Royal Air Force and who may now make application to re-enter the force

Sir V. WARRENDER: A number of officers who have recently retired or been transferred to the reserve will be employed in administrative and specialist posts, under civilian conditions of service. There will also be opportunities for skilled airmen who have been discharged or transferred to the reserve to re-enlist for a period of four years' regular service.

Mr. HASLAM: Does that include pilots?

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

CUSTOMS FINES.

Mr. PETHERICK: 32
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (1) if he is aware that the customs authorities, in writing to importers of foreign goods informing them that they have imposed a fine upon them for incorrect entry, although no fraud has been alleged, have claimed as their reason for the fine that it is to mark the irregularity; and if he will issue instructions to discontinue this expression, as it causes offence to respectable firms;
(2) if he is aware that the customs authorities have recently been imposing
fines on importers of foreign goods for incorrect entry in cases in which no fraud is alleged and in which the fault has been entirely due to a bona fide mistake on the part of the foreign exporter; and if he will put a stop to this practice;
(3) if he is aware that the customs authorities impose a fine on importers of foreign goods who receive documents in which clerical mistakes are made, even if the mistake is revealed by means of a post entry by the importers to the customs authorities; what action will be taken to stop fines being imposed in such eases; and whether he will give instructions for the amount of such fines to be refunded?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Duff Cooper): Under Customs law, goods incorrectly entered are liable to seizure and the importer to a penalty and this liability is not affected by the fact that the incorrectness may be due to error or carelessness rather than fraudulent intent. The Commissioners of Customs and Excise have power, however, to waive such forfeiture and to mitigate any such penalty incurred, and I understand that it is, and has been for very many years, their practice to impose small fines under those provisions in certain cases of incorrect entry even though no intention to defraud is suspected. The expression to which my hon. Friend refers is designed to avoid any imputation of fraudulent intent, and I cannot see why it should cause offence as it is a correct description of what has taken place. Risk to the Revenue is involved in cases of error as well as in cases of fraud, and the practice of the Commissioners is dictated by the importance of reducing that risk to the minimum. I see no reason to interfere with it, but if my hon. Friend considers that it has been improperly applied in any case and will give me full particulars I will have further inquiry made.

Mr. PETHERICK: Owing perhaps to the incorrect understanding of the word "irregularity," will my hon. Friend consider doing away with this particular expression in such cases?

Mr. COOPER: I am not prepared to enter into an argument with my hon. Friend as to the meaning of words, particularly the word "irregularity." I think that the term confined to a customs entry does not imply any moral obloquy.

Mr. MACUUISTEN: Why not make it innocent irregularity "?

TURKEY.

Mr. DINGLE FOOT: 55.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can now make any announcement with regard to the negotiations for a clearing arrangement with Turkey?

Lieut.-Colonel J. COLVILLE (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department): I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend on this subject to the hon. Member for East Wolverhampton (Mr. Mander) on the 23rd May, to which I have as yet nothing to add.

DENMARK.

Mr. HALL-CAINE: 51.
asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent Denmark has reduced import licences for British manufactured goods during the current year; whether he has received any complaints with regard to this matter from British manufacturers; and whether he will take any action in the matter, in view of the terms of the Danish trade agreement with this country?


            Lieut.-Colonel
            COLVILLE
          : According to my information, the allocation of licences for the import of United Kingdom goods into Denmark in the period January to April, 1935, was larger than in the corresponding period of last year. Some complaints in regard to the allocation of licences for the period May to August have been received and are being investigated.

ARMAMENTS (EXPORTS).

Mr. LUNN: 52.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the total number of armaments of various grades and the value of the same supplied to foreign countries from Great Britain in the years 1931, 1932, 1933, and 1934?

Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLE: I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing the quantity and value of arms, ammunition and military and naval stores exported from the United Kingdom to foreign countries in the year 1934. Corresponding particulars in respect of the years 1931 to 1933 appear on pages 347 to 355 of Volume III of the Annual Statement of Trade, 1933.

Mr. LUNN: Are there no means within the power of the Government to

Following are the statistics:

Statement showing the total quantity and declared value of arms and ammunition (except sporting arms and ammunition) and military and naval stores registered as exported from the United Kingdom to foreign countries during the year, 1934.


Description.
Unit of Quantity.
Quantity.
Declared Value.


Ammunition:


£


Shot and shell
No.
58,017




Cwts.
6,418
150,581


Metal cartridge cases, other than small arms and ammunition.
No.
676




Cwts.
116
570


Small arms ammunition:





Military ammunition:





Loaded cartridges
No.
16,137,711




Cwts.
7,511
80,541


Empty cartridge cases
No.
—




Cwts.
—
—


Fuses and blasting accessories:





Safety fuse
Coil of 24 ft.
5,155,978



Other fuses, tubes, primers, etc
Cwts.
326
10,329


Other accessories (including detonators, cables, etc.).
Cwts.
563
31,942


Propellant powders:





Cordite and other smokeless propellants
Cwts.
248
5,056


Other descriptions
Cwts.
274
2,227


High explosives:





Blasting powder
Cwts.
448
1,569


Collodion cotton (nitro-cellulose), dry, including wet collodion cotton if intended for use as an explosive.
Cwts.
74
574


Other sorts:





Gelatinous
Cwts.
14,167
84,929


Non-gelatinous
Cwts.
12,914
76,916


Rockets and pyrotechnic products
Value

2405


Explosives and ammunition, not elsewhere specified.
Value

108,746


Arms:





Ordnance:





Guns, howitzers, mortars and parts thereof
No.
33




Cwts.
2,597
118,793


Automatic machine and quick firing guns and parts thereof.
No.
703




Cwts.
986
167,872


Gun mountings and carriages and parts thereof.
No.
8




Cwts.
1,207
28,982


Small arms:





Military rifles and carbines
No.
2,728




Cwts.
220
10,475


Revolvers and pistols (except air pistols) and parts thereof.
No.
773




Cwts.
47
2,502


Other guns, rifles and carbines and air pistols
No.
849




Cwts.
32
1,811


Other parts of guns, rifles, carbines and pistols.
Cwts.
90
5,343


Swords, cutlasses, bayonets and arms of other sorts not firearms.
No.
1,115




Cwts.
19
1,001


Torpedoes and submarine mine appliances
No.
11




Cwts.
703
25,012


Military, naval and ordnance stores and appliances, not elsewhere specified.
Value

263,076


Total
Value
—
1,285,374


NOTE—Exports of exploration, etc, for industrial purpose are included in the above figure.

stop this encouragement to the slaughter beings?

Mr. LUNN: 53.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the names of the foreign countries who have purchased arms of one kind or another from Great Britain in the years 1931, 1932, 1933, and 1934?

Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLE: The 33 principal foreign countries to which exports of arms and ammunition from this country are consigned are shown on page 355 of Volume III of the Annual Statement of Trade, 1933.

TANGANYIKA (JAPANESE IMPORTS).

Mr. SUTCLIFFE: 49.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the fact that Japan's imports into Tanganyika are still increasing; and whether, in view of the fact that Japan has now left the League of Nations, the terms of the mandate so far as tariffs are concerned are regarded as applying to her products

The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part of the question, the various legal issues affecting the mandated territories arising out of Japan's resignation from the League are now under consideration.

Mr. SUTCLIFFE: May I askwhether the British Government have drawn the attention of the League of Nations to the fact that Japan has resigned from the League but is still retaining all the benefits to be obtained by membership from these mandated territories?

Sir P.CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I think that all the countries, whether members of the League of Nations or otherwise, are aware of the fact that Japan has withdrawn from the League.

Captain GUEST: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Japanese bicycles are being sold in Tanga and D'aar es Salaan at 27s., and that the lowest price quoted for English goods is 63s. I Is he prepared to take any steps in the matter?

Sir P.CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I know that Japanese bicycles are sold much cheaper than other bicycles, but I was asked about the legal questions, which are very complicated.

Sir JOSEPH LAMB: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Japanese not only compete fairly but unfairly by copying our trade marks?

GOVERNMENTDEPARTMENTS (MECHANISED METHODS)

Mr. McENTEE: 35.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to what extent the Treasury is introducing mechanisation of accountancy and clerical work in Government Departments; and whether he can give details?

Mr. COOPER: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my predecessor to the hon. Member for Henley (Sir G. Fox) on the 4th May, 1933. Later information as to the position in certain Departments, namely, the Board of Education, the Admiralty, the Ministry of Health, the War Office, the Post Office and the Customs and Excise Department, was given by the Ministers concerned on the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 11th March last. I am sending the hon. Member for convenience of reference copies of all the above replies.

ROYALMINT(DISTRIBUTIONOF GOLD PIECES).

Brigadier-General MAKINS: 37.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he has arranged to set aside any special Jubilee £50 gold pieces for the national collections at the British and other museums?

Mr. COOPER: Besides the 25 gold pattern pieces offered to collectors, five similar pieces were struck by the Royal Mint, of which one was presented to His Majesty The King; one was reserved for the Mint Museum; and one each was offered to the British Museum, the Bank of England and the Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths for their collections, on payment of the bullion value of the gold.

Mr. GODFREY NICHOLSON: Can my hon. Friend say why so very few were issued; was there some good reason?

Mr. COOPER: It was that they were issued for the purposes of collectors, and whatever figure was arrived at it must necessarily have been an arbitrary figure. If it were a larger one, some people might have said that it was too many; and, if it had been a smaller one, some people might have said it was too small.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: Will my hon. Friend consider issuing some of these gold pieces for the payment of Members of Parliament on the occasion of the next instalment of their salaries?

Oral Answers to Questions — AGRICULTURE.

MILK POLICY.

Major CARVER: 39.
asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the Government have considered any steps to meet the difficulties caused by the rapid increase which is taking place in the milk supply of the country; and what policy it intends to adopt?

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Elliot): The rapid increase in the milk supply of this country is in the first place a matter for consideration by the producers themselves, who are giving it close attention through their organisation, the Milk Marketing Board. The matter is further being considered by the Great Britain Milk Reorganisation Commission. The Government's milk policy is embodied in the Milk Act, 1934, but any further representations or suggestions that may be put forward for dealing with this problem will, I assure my hon. and gallant Friend, receive the Government's very careful consideration.

Brigadier-General BROWN: Have not the Government considered a levy on imported foreign manufactured milk so as to relieve the glut on the liquid milk market and add to the pool from which liquid milk is drawn?

Mr. ELLIOT: I do not think that that would be possible under existing agreements and arrangements.

BACON PRODUCTION.

Mr. HALL-CAINE: 38.
asked the Minister of Agriculture what action he proposes to take with regard to the new scheme submitted to him for the setting up of a bacon development board which would control the entire production of bacon in this country?

Mr. ELLIOT: In accordance with the requirements of the First Schedule to the Agricultural Marketing Act, 1933, my tight hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, and I have directed the
Pigs and Bacon Marketing Boards to publish notice of the submission of the scheme stating where copies of the scheme may be obtained or inspected, and notifying that any objections or representations made with respect to the scheme should be submitted to my right hon. Friend or myself not later than June 29th. It is not possible to give any indication as to further steps until such time has elapsed after the date I have mentioned to allow for full consideration to be given to any representations and objections that may duly be made.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

MILK MARKETING BOARD.

Mr. DINGLE FOOT: 40.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has een called to an article in the official journal of the Scottish Milk Marketing Board, dated 20th March, 1935, stating that we ought to see that money spent in social services is not used to employ labour on land abroad instead of on our own farm land, and that to the extent that we allow imported food to claim that market we shall only add to our unemployment problem; and whether he will advise the Board that it is undesirable that a public body, founded with a loan of public money and maintained by a statutory levy, should indulge in partisan statements and political propaganda?

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir Godfrey Collins): I have seen the article referred to but the matter is not one which comes within my jurisdiction.

Mr. FOOT: Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is properly one of the functions of the Board to publish propaganda on matters of acute political controversy?

Sir G. COLLINS: I am not called upon to adjudicate upon these matters. The Milk Marketing Board is a statutory body, and on this matter I have no power to intervene.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: Is my right hon. Friend aware that it is a matter of common sense and not of acute political controversy?

PUBLIC ASSISTANCE (OUTDOOR RELIEF).

Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: 42 and 44.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) the number of persons in receipt of outdoor relief at the end of March and April, 1935;
(2) the number of unemployed persons and their dependants in receipt

Number of persons in receipt of outdoor relief in Scotland.


—
Ordinary poor.
Able-bodied unemployment.
Total.



Number.
Dependants.
Number.
Dependants.
Number.
Dependants.


At 15th March,1935
97,025
105,484
58,998
99,497
156,023
204,981


At 15th April,1935
97,914
106,853
56,262
90,224
154,176
197,077

HOUSING, LANARKSHIRE.

Mr. GRAHAM: 43.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware of a lack of housing accommodation in the burgh of Hamilton and many parts of the county of Lanark; that as a consequence many houses at present inhabited are in an uninhabitable condition, and that, due to the long continued unemployment in that area, many families have been evicted and have no alternative but to occupy empty houses that have been closed under closing orders, thus rendering themselves liable to fine and imprisonment; and whether any action can, or will, be taken by his Department to provide temporary accommodation for those families until houses can be provided?

Sir G. COLLINS: The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second and third parts, I am informed that in the burgh of Hamilton a number of families are occupying houses that are subject to demolition or closing orders. No such cases are known to exist in the county area. As regards the last part, I am informed that no temporary accommodation is available, but the local authorities are proceeding with the erection of 3,014 houses in the burgh of Hamilton and the county of Lanark.

Mr. GRAHAM: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a man was convicted in the Hamilton Sheriff Court on Monday of this week, and can he inform me whether houses that are being built will

of outdoor relief at the end of March and April, 1935?

Sir G. COLLINS: I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, as the reply involves a table of figures, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the table:

be eligible for letting to the persons who occupy these houses which are closed under a closing order?

Sir G. COLLINS: I am aware of the case referred to, but as the hon. Member well knows the question of who are to occupy these houses is entirely a matter for the local authority.

Mr. GRAHAM: Is it the view of the Department that there is to be no alternative to imprisonment or fine for the persons who are involved in this question?

Sir G. COLLINS: I hope that no answer of mine at any time has led anyone to think that.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: If a man sleeps in a derelict house and there is no other house available, he should be left alone. If he sleeps in the open he will be imprisoned for that.

HERRING INDUSTRY.

Mr. HENDERSON STEWART: 41.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether the Herring Industry Board has considered the proposal to organise a herring week in London; and whether he will represent to the board the value of this form of propaganda during the coming autumn when the home market most needs stimulating and press for an early start on the necessary plans?

Sir G. COLLINS: The proposal has been communicated to the Herring Industry Board and I am informed that they
will be glad to consider it fully in connection with their investigation into the possibility of developing the home market.

Mr. STEWART: Will the right hon. Gentleman convey to the Herring Board that British Industries House has offered to co-operate in this matter and has very special facilities to give to the herring trade if such a demonstration were organised?

Sir G. COLLINS: I am informed that the board are taking active steps to make all relevant inquiries into what can be done to increase the home market, and no doubt they will get into touch with the body in question.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the fish dealers are charging 6d. a pound for herring although when the agitation was going on the price was lowered temporarily to 4d., and that it is this extravagant charge in the retail shops which is preventing people from buying herring?

Sir G. COLLINS: All these matters will come within the purview of the Herring Board.

Mr. LUNN: Would it not be possible to pass this information on to the London hotels to see whether or not they can encourage the home market rather than the foreign market?

Sir G. COLLINS: I am sure that questions and answers in this House not only come to the notice of hotels in London but they cover a much larger sphere.

Mr. PETHERICK: Would it not be much better to organise a herring week in Edinburgh and see how it goes?

Mr. STEWART: 50.
asked the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether he can make a statement on the results of the inquiries made into the possibility of openings for British herring in overseas countries?

Lieut.-Colonel J. COLVILLE: An inquiry as to possible markets for cured and smoked herring was addressed to 50 overseas posts and, so far 40 replies have been received and examined. While these replies do not point to any large additional markets for cured or smoked herring, there are indications in certain of the replies of some possibilities for
the expansion of the trade. The Department of Overseas Trade is working in co-operation with the other Departments concerned with'a view to following up such openings as the inquiry has revealed.

Mr. STEWART: Is the hon. and gallant Member also working in association with the Herring Industry Board?

Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLE: Yes, Sir.

IMPERIAL DEFENCE.

Brigadier-General NATION: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether the question of Imperial defence has yet been discussed with the representatives of the Dominions who came here for the Jubilee; and whether he has any information to give to the House?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the communique issuéd on the 23rd May, where it was stated that
the discussion on the international situation, particularly with regard to its defence aspects, was resumed.
As regards the second part, of the question, it was agreed that the discussions should be of an informal and private character.

PALESTINE (RAILWAY DEVELOPMENT).

Captain PETER MACDONALD: 46.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when the report of Sir Felix Pole on Palestine railway development will be available; and what steps will be taken to ensure that all new construction work involving the import of material will be available in the first place to British manufacturers?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I do not think the High Commissioner has yet actually received Sir Felix Pole's report, and no decision has been taken on the question of publication. Any materials which it may be found necessary to import in connection with railway development in Palestine will be ordered through the Crown Agents for the Colonies in accordance with the usual practice.

Mr. JANNER: In view of the public importance of the issues raised by this investigation, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether any copies of the report will be available for Members of Parliament?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: We had better see the report first.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Why should we put on the Holy Land an obsolescent system of railway transport when motor transport would be infinitely better developed in that country?

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL INDUSTRY.

EXPORTS (COLONIES).

Colonel ROPNER: 48.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what was the quantity of foreign and British coal, respectively, purchased by the principal Colonies during 1934 and 1930; and what steps have been taken during the past year with a view to increasing the proportion of British coal supplies to such Colonies?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT figures of the imports of coal in 1930 and 1934 into those territories in the Colonial Empire for which 1934 figures are available and figures for 1930 and 1933 for the whole of the Colonial Empire. No representations have reached me on the subject of this trade in the last year, and no special action has been taken. It is, of course, the practice of those Colonies which charge any duty on imports of coal and are free to grant Imperial preference, to charge no duty or a lower duty on British coal, but the hon. and gallant Member will appreciate that there are a number of Colonial Dependencies, particularly in the Far East, where it is not economically practicable to import coal from the United Kingdom, and that there is a substantial local production of coal in certain Dependencies, notably Nigeria and Malaya.

Following are the figures:

(a)Comparison between 1930 and 1933, for all Dependencies, and

(b)Comparison between 1930 and 1934 for the 14 Dependencies for which figures for 1934 are available. These 14 Dependencies are:

Kenya and Uganda (counted as one).
Malta.



Ceylon.


Nyasaland.
Hong Kong.


Tanganyika.
Malaya.


Zanzibar.
Bahamas.


Gold Coast.
St. Vincent.


Sierra Leone.
British Guiana.


Cyprus.

(A)


Year.
Imports in tons from




United Kingdom.
Other British Countries.
Foreign Countries.


1930
…
350,000
1,098,000
1,303,000


1933
…
430,000
1,025,000
1,180,000


(B)


1930
…
267,000
853,000
1,129,000


1934
…
117,000
561,000
802,000

ACCIDENTS (PONY DRIVERS AND PONIES).

Mr. LUNN: 68.
asked the Secretary for Mines the total number of ponies in coal mines in 1913 and 1934, respectively, and the total number of pony drivers killed or injured in each of those years?

The SECRETARY for MINES(Mr. Ernest Brown): In 1913, 73,024 ponies were employed in coal mines and, so far as information is available, 82 pony-drivers were killed. The corresponding figures for 1934 were 37,751 and 34. Particulars of the number of pony-drivers injured in these years are not available.

Mr. LUNN: In view of the safety first proposals in mines will the Secretary for Mines call the attention of His Majesty's Inspectors to the matter so that better facilities may be provided for pony-drivers to do their work and prevent further loss of life?

Mr. BROWN: I will consider that.

Mr. G. NICHOLSON: How many pony-drivers were killed through head injuries?

Mr. BROWN: I will try to get the information if the hon. Member will put down a question.

WAGES AND OUTPUT, DURHAM.

Mr. BATEY: 69.
asked the Secretary for Mines the average weekly wage paid, the daily output per man, and the number of workmen employed in and about the coal mines of the county of Durham for each year from 1920 to 1934?

Mr. E. BROWN: As the reply involves a statistical table, I will, with the hon.

Following is the table:

Coal Mining Industry in Durham.


Year.
Average Weekly Cash Earnings of all wage-earners employed.
Output per manshift worked.
Average Number of Persons Employed.



Wage-earners.
Clerks and Salaried Persons.





£
s.
d.
Cwts.




1920
…
…
4
2
3*
14.40
175,170








Jan. to Mar. 14.55



1921
…
…
3
9
10*
Apl. to Sept. not available.
158,577








Oct. toDec.17.63



1922
…
…
2
3
2
17.80
161,652


1923
…
…
2
9
10
17.32
174.192


1924
…
…
2
9
8
17.16
170,612
4,144


1925
…
…
2
7
8
18.15
140,855
2,145








Jan to Apl. 18.70
March



1926
…
…
2
10
4*
145,019
2,203








December









114,727
2,201


1927
…
…
2
4
6
21.68
128,578
2,147


1928
…
…
2
0
0
21.74
128,017
2,138


1929
…
…
2
0
11
21.65
136,792
2,035


1930
…
…
1
19
7
21.54
131,252
2,030


1931
…
…
1
18
4
21.88
113,223
1,941


1932
…
…
1
17
11
22.09
104,234
1,730


1933
…
…
1
18
4
22.09
101,231
1,680


1934
…
…
2
0
4
22.12
106,198
1,675


* Periods affected by disputes have been excluded in calculating the average weekly cash earnings. The dispute in 1920 lasted about 3 weeks, but as quarterly returns only are available the whole of the quarter affected has been excluded.

NOTE.—It should be noted that the particulars of cash earnings shown above do not include the value of allowances in kind which, in Durham, amounted on the average to 5s. 6d. per week in 1934.

SUNDAY WORK, SCOTLAND.

70. Mr. LAWSON: 70.
asked the Secretary for Mines whether there has been any curtailment of coal drawing on Sundays in those mines in Scotland which have recently been the subject of inquiry by him; and, if not, what steps he proposes to take to put an end to this objectionable practice?

Mr. E. BROWN:: I understand that the Lanarkshire Miners' Union raised the question of Sunday working with the coal-owners at a recent meeting of the Conciliation Board, and I hope this will lead to a very substantial reduction in such working. I shall keep myself informed of the result both in that and in other Scottish districts.

Mr. LAWSON: In view of the fact that the hon. Member recently informed the House that over 50 men were working on

Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Sundays, will he not use his personal influence in the matter, and, in case no agreement is arrived at, deal with the question by legislation?

Mr. BROWN: I would rather wait and see the results of the discussions between the two parties on the Conciliation Board. It would be better to get the matter settled by agreement rather than by force.

Mr. LAWSON: Has not the Secretary for Mines already waited a long time?

Mr. BROWN: That may be so, but the facts of the case were not available until I ascertained them.

Mr. BUCHANAN: While the hon. Member is waiting the position is becoming worse. Will he not take steps in the meantime to hurry on the matter?

Mr. BR OWN: The hon. Member is under a misapprehension. The statement is that the position is better.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Although the output of coal was 14,000,000 tons larger than in the previous year, 3,000 fewer miners were employed. Does he not think it is his responsibility to take action and not wait too long?

Mr. BROWN: Hon. Members who take an interest in this matter know that I have taken a great deal of interest in it; and still do.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRANSPORT.

MOTOR INSURANCE.

Mr. THORNE: 54.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will appoint a committee to inquire into the causes of a number of insurance companies going into liquidation and not being able to meet their liabilities; whether his attention has been drawn to the case arising out of a motor accident in which the defendant was insured with the London General Insurance Company, who have gone into liquidation; whether he is aware that the defendant has been called upon to meet the damages and costs, which exceed £1,000, and has been ordered by the court to pay one-third of his salary so long as he is in employment until the debt is cleared; whether he has seen the remarks made by Mr. Justice Clausen about the case; and what action he intends taking in the matter?

Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLE: My right hon. Friend has seen a report of the case to which the hon. Member refers and I can assure him that earnest consideration is being given to the questions arising from the failure of these companies.

Mr. THORNE: Has there been any consultation with the Law Officers of the Crown with a view to seeing whether they can deal with these matters, and also look into the position of any other company?

Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLE: I understand that the question is being examined in every aspect.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Why did not one company take all these others over, instead of allowing all these rubbishy companies to get hold?

FIREMEN'S GONG.

Mr. BAT EY: 62.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that on Wednesday, 22nd May, a motor car, is which were two firemen and another gentleman, was running along New Oxford Street sounding a gong continuously, similar to a fire-engine going to a fire; and whether he will take steps to put an end to the use by unauthorised persons of gongs on motor cars?

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Mr. Hore-Belisha): I had not heard of this incident and the use by firemen of a gong does not on the face of it seem to be an abuse of established practice.

Mr. BATEY: Are we to understand that there are some motor cars to which the Highway Code does not apply; that it all depends on who is in the car?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Certainly, it depends on who is in the car.

MOTOR VEHICLES (EXTINGUISHERS).

Mr. HALES: 63.
asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been called to the death of Mrs. Beatrice Tait, who was trapped in a blazing car on the Great North Road, near Newcastle-on-Tyne, on the 26th instance; whether he is aware that four people were seriously burned in a motor car which overturned and caught fire on the Kingsbury Road, near Castle Bromwich, on the same date; and whether, having regard to the numerous cases of burning car fatalities on the road, he will make compulsory the fitting of fire extinguishers on private cars which are now compulsory on all public service vehicles?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Inquiries are being made regarding the types of cars involved in these two accidents, and whether there were any special features (for example, the position of the petrol tank) which might render them especially liable to catch fire. I am naturally ready to take any steps to circumscribe proved dangers, but I do not desire to make regulations which may prove burdensome to motorists without adequate cause being shown. The report on fatal road accidents for 1933, issued by my Department, shows that only in seven cases were fatal accidents attributed to explosion or fire on motor vehicles.

Mr. HALES: Is the hon. Member aware that on this particular occasion the father of this unfortunate lady, a man nearly 70 years of age, was only saved from sharing her fate by the providential arrival of another car fitted with a fire extinguisher, with which they were able to keep the flames down and enable the two unconscious persons to be dragged out of the blazing car. Is it not time that something was done in the interests of humanity?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: I have told my hon. Friend that I am making inquiries into the case, and we shall see whether they confirm what the hon. Member has said.

Mr. HALES: But while the Minister is making inquiries more deaths are taking place. How many more deaths must take place before he takes the necessary action?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: The number of deaths from this cause do not indicate such a situation.

TOLL BRIDGES.

Major CARVER: 64.
asked the Minister of Transport whether it is still the policy of his Department to give grants of 75 per cent. towards the cost of freeing perpetual tolls on bridges; and whether he will support the freeing of Bubwith toll bridge, in the East Riding of Yorkshire, on these terms?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: The amount of grant in this case depends upon whether proposals for the freeing of the bridge from tolls are accompanied by proposals for the reconstruction of the bridge. The regular rates of grant towards approved expenditure on the freeing of roads and bridges from tolls are set out in my letter to local authorities of the 5th February, 1935, namely, 60 per cent. in the case of Class I roads and 50 per cent. in other cases. Towards approved proposals for the reconstruction of weak bridges, I am prepared to offer grants of 75 per cent.

Major CARVER: Is the Minister of Transport aware that on the 10th April he gave the House information that he was prepared to give 75 per cent. towards the cost of freeing perpetual tolls, and that on that the local authority were induced to buy this bridge?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: The terms are set out in the letter to which I have referred, and again in the reply to this question. If there has been any misapprehension, I take this opportunity of correcting it.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: May I ask whether the 75 per cent. grant applies to all weak bridges which are to be reconstructed?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: All approved.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Will the constitution of the authority which happens to make the application have any effect on the decision?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: The highway authority has to make the application.

Major CARVER: Are we to understand that the policy as stated on the 10th April is not now to be carried out?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: I have given a full answer. It depends on whether at the same time as the tolls are freed there is to be reconstruction. I have set out the provision in full, and I hope it will make the matter clear.

Mr. PALING: Has any proposal been made to alter this bridge?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: I am awaiting proposals now.

LOWER THAMES STREET (CUSTOM HOUSE QUAY).

Major CARVER: 56.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he is aware that the public are debarred from access to the river frontage of His Majesty's Custom House in Lower Thames Street; and whether, as this was a war-time regulation following on a free access from time immemorial to this promenade for city workers, he is prepared to restore this public right?

The FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS (Mr. Ormsby-Gore): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. In regard to the second part, I much regret that it is not possible to restore public access to the Custom House quay until the temporary building erected on the quay and still in use can be removed.

Major CARVER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these unsightly
huts have been there for over 20 years, and could not some other accommodation be provided for the Custom House officials who use the seats and promenade originally provided for the general public?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I am advised that the present pressure of work on the London Custom House officials is such that there is no possibility of moving them at present. They must be accommodated there. As soon as the pressure can be relieved, and if they Can be accommodated elsewhere—it would mean a big undertaking—then, of course, it would revert to previous user.

Major CARVER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these seats were placed there by the Metropolitan Public Gardens Association for public enjoyment?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I am fully aware that the continuance of this temporary user by the Custom House officials does conflict with the original intention.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Do you charge the Custom House officials 2d. a seat?

HOUSESOFPARLIAMENT (REPAIRS).

Mr. TINKER: 57.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he is now in a position to say when the renovation of the Houses of Parliament now in progress will be completed, and what is the estimated total cost?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: It is hoped that the repair of the stonework will be completed within six years and that the total cost will be well within the estimate of 2750,000.

Mr. BURNETT: Can the right lion. Gentleman give us any idea how long it will be before this process will have to be repeated? Would it not be much better in the long run to erect new buildings of durable material, such as Aberdeen granite?

MIGRATION.

Brigadier-General NATION: 58.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether the question of migration has yet been discussed with the
representatives of the Dominions who came here for the Jubilee; and whether he has any information to give to the House?

The SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS(Mr. J. H. Thomas): I am in touch with the Prime Ministers both of the Commonwealth of Australia and of New Zealand on this subject with a view to discussion, but I am not in a position to make any statement.

AVIATION (AIRCRAFT FACTORIES).

Mr. HALES: 66.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether, when selecting sites for the establishment of air service factories, he will consider the suitability of the neighbourhood of Stoke-on-Trent, which is situate on the main route from London to the north and offers exceptional facilities for the location of such a factory, which will have the additional advantage of being in close proximity to the Meir aerodrome, one of the finest aerodromes in this country?

Sir V. WARRENDER: The question of the location of sites for aircraft factories is primarily one for the firms concerned. My hon. Friend may like to place himself in communication with the Society of British Aircraft Constructors in regard to this matter.

SOUTHAFRICA (DE BEERS MINING COMPANY).

Sir CYRIL COBB: 71.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction existing among the small holders of De Beers preference shares at the attempt by the board to sacrifice their rights for the benefit of equity shareholders; and, in view of the difficulty such widely-spread small shareholders have of joining together to make their voice heard at the coming meeting, will he, if duly invited, use his powers under the Companies Act to protect the public and arrange that full voting weight be given to the collected opposition to the directors' proposals in their present form?

Mr. J. H. THOMAS: The company in question is registered in the Union of
South Africa, and any question concerning it is therefore a matter for the Union authorities.

Sir C. COBB: Has my right hon. Friend communicated or will he communicate with the Government of South Africa in order to ensure that they may take the necessary steps within their power to protect public interests in this matter?

Mr. THOMAS: I never interfere with other people's business.

EGYPT (ITALIAN AEROPLANES).

Mr. MANDER: 72.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will state the attitude of His Majesty's Government to the arrangement between the Egyptian and Italian Governments for Italian military aeroplanes to fly over Egyptian territory?

The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Mr. Eden): Requests for permission for Italian aircraft to fly over Egypt are communicated to the Egyptian Government through the diplomatic channel and His Majesty's Government see no reason to suggest any modification of this entirely normal procedure.

Mr. MANDER: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether an arrangement of this kind would come within the scope of the four reserve points between this country and Egypt?

Mr. EDEN: Since His Majesty's Government are responsible for defence in Egypt, co-operation between the two Governments, His Majesty's Government and the Egyptian Government, in a matter of this kind naturally exists.

Mr. MANDER: In the event of war would not a different situation arise?

Mr. EDEN: I very much deprecate any such suggestion.

JURY SERVICE.

Mr. ROBINSON: 16.
asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware of the waste of time involved in demanding the heads of important business concerns to serve on special juries; and whether he will consider making some change in the method of selection of such juries which
would avoid the dislocation following upon the absence of important executives from their places of business?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Service as a special juror is a public duty which must on occasion inconvenience individuals. Any person who is summoned may apply for excusal to the Summoning Officer or to the Court, but such excusals must necessarily be restricted to cases where real urgency is shown. To regard as a sufficient reason for excusal the claims of business as such would deprive the Courts of valuable special jurors.

Mr. ROBINSON: Does not my right hon. Friend think that the time has come for a reform of procedure which involves so much time being spent waiting about the Law Courts?

SILVER JUBILEE CROWN AND PATTERN PIECES.

Mr. ROBINSON: 36.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what were the actual arrangements made for the issue of the pattern Silver Jubilee crown pieces; and whether he is aware that the public have been unable to obtain them through the banks at the nominal price of issue, and that the dealers are offering them for sale at a price of £6 a piece instead of the nominal rate of 7s. 6d. a piece?

Mr. COOPER: My hon. Friend seems to have confused the 5s. coins bearing the Jubilee design with the silver pattern pieces. The former are ordinary coins obtainable through the banks at their face value of 5s. Over 150,000 have been issued already, and they will remain on offer until the end of the year. The pattern pieces, the issue of which was publicly announced before the Jubilee, are not coins, and only a limited number of them, 2,500 in all, were struck for supply to collectors at an issue price of 7s. 6d. Applications were dealt with only at the Royal Mint and in the order in which they were received. One piece was issued to each successful applicant. In reply to the last part of the question, I have no responsibility for the present market price, but my hon. Friend may rest assured that dealers have had no opportunity of obtaining the patterns which was not open to members of the public in all parts of the country.

Mr. ROBINSON: is my hon. Friend aware that while the public applications were not satisfied a large number of the pattern pieces are in the hands of dealers, who are offering them at very inflated prices?

Mr. COOPER: The dealers have probaply purchased them at inflated prices and are offering them at still higher prices. It was not intended that there should be a universal supply of them, but only a limited number which were supplied to those people who applied first.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Are they only collectors who are engaged in the lottery?

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. LANSBURY: Would the Prime Minister state what is the business for next week, and how far he proposes to go to-night?

The PRIME MINISTER: I propose to move the suspension of the Eleven o'Clock Rule in order to make sure that we shall finish the Report stage of the Government of India Bill, and also to get the following Orders: Third Reading of the Superannuation Bill and the Report of the two Supplementary Estimates which were taken in Committee last night. I understand that these are not controversial. The business for next week is:

Monday: Supply (7th Allotted Day) Committee; Ministry of Transport Vote.

Tuesday and Wednesday: Third Reading of the Government of India Bill.

Thursday: Second Reading of the National Health Insurance and Contributory Pensions Bill and the Committee stage of the necessary Money

Division No. 228.]
AYES.
[3.42 p.m.


Adams, Samuel Vyvyan T. (Leeds, W.)
Bossom, A. C.
Cautley, Sir Henry S.


Albery, Irving James
Boulton, W. W.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir H. R. (Prtsmth., S.)


Allen, Lt.-Col. J. Sandeman (B'k'nh'd)
Bowyer, Capt. Sir George E. W.
Cazalat, Thelma (lslington, E.)


Align, William (Stoke-on-Trent)
Briscoe, Capt. Richard George
Caralet, Capt. V. A. (Chippenham)


Allen, Lt.Col. Sir William (Armagh)
Broadbent, Colonel John
Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.Sir J.A.(Birm.,W.)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N.(Edgbaston)


Assheton, Ralph
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd, Hexham)
Chapman, Sir Samuel (Edinburgh, S.)


Atholl, Duchess of
Brown, Brig.Gen.H.C.(Berks.,Newb'y)
Chorlton, Alan Ernest Leofric


Baillie, Sir Adrian W. M.
Browne, Capta'in A. C.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Balfour, Capt. Harold (I. of Thanet)
Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.


Barton, Capt. Basil Kelsey
Burnett, John George
Collins, Rt. Hon. Sir Godfrey


Beauchamp, Sir Brograve Campbell
Butler, Richard Austen
Colman, N. C. D.


Beaumont, Hon. R.E.S. (Portsm'th.O)
Cadogan, Hon. Edward
Conant, R. J. E.


Benn, Sir Arthur Shirley
Campbell, Sir Edward Taswell (Brmly)
Cook, Thomas A.


Bernays, Robert
Campbell-Johnston, Malcolm
Cooke, Douglas


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Caporn, Arthur Cecil
Cooper, A. Duff


Blindell, James
Carver, Major William H.
Craddock, Sir Reginald Henry

Resolution: and if there be time, the Second Reading of the Counterfeit Currency (Convention) Bill (Lords); Second Reading of the Criminal Lunatics (Scotland) Bill; and the Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolution. Both of these Bills have come from another place.

Friday: The Motion for the Whitsuntide Adjournment. The House will reassemble after the Recess on Monday, 17th June.

On any day, if time permits, other Orders may be taken.

Mr. MAXTON: May I ask the Prime Minister whether he has seen statements in the newspapers indicating that a large reconstruction in the Government is to take place? The House is keenly interested in this matter, and will he therefore take steps to see that if these changes are to take place, an announcement will be made to the House before the Adjournment for the Whitsuntide holiday?

The PRIME MINISTER: That is quite contrary to precedent. It is true that I have seen announcements in the newspapers, but they are really so varied and contradictory that I am not quite sure from where the information is being supplied.

Mr. MAXTON: Is the House to take it that the newspaper stories are completely without foundation?

Motion made, and Question put:

" That the Procedings on Government Business be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House."—[The Prime Minister.]

Cranborne, Viscount
Kerr, Hamilton W.
Ramsden, Sir Eugene


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Keyes, Admiral Sir Roger
Rankin, Robert


Crookshank, Capt. H. C. (Gainsb'ro)
Kimball, Lawrence
Rathbone, Eleanor


Culverwell, Cyril Tom
Kirkpatrick, William M.
Reed, Arthur C. (Exeter)


Curry, A. C.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. C. C.
Lamb, Sir Joseph Quinton
Robinson, John Roland


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George
Ropner, Colonel L.


Davison, Sir William Henry
Law, Sir Alfred
Rosbotham, Sir Thomas


Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.
Leckle, J. A.
Ross Taylor, Walter (Woodbridge)


Dickle, John P.
Leech, Dr. J. W.
Runge, Norah Cecil


Doran, Edward
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Dower, Captain A. V. G.
Lennox-Boyd, A. T.
Rutherford, Sir John Hugo (Liverp'l)


Drewe, Cedric
Levy, Thomas
Salmon, Sir Isldore


Dugdale, Captain Thomas Lionel
Lewis, Oswald
Samuel, Sir Arthur Michael (F'nham)


Duggan, Hubert John
Lindsay, Kenneth (Kilmarnock)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)


Duncan, James A. L. (Kensington, N.)
Lindsay, Noel Ker
Samuel, M. R. A. (W'ds'wth, Putney)


Eden, Rt. Hon. Anthony
Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip Cunliffe-
Sandys, Duncan


Elliot, Rt. Hon. Walter
Llewellin, Major John J,
Savery, Servington


Emmott, Charles E. G. C.
Lloyd, Geoffrey
Shaw, Helen B. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Evans, R. T. (Carmarthen)
Lovat-Fraser, James Alexander
Shepperson, Sir Ernest W.


Fermoy, Lord
Lumley, Captain Lawrence R.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Flelden, Edward Brocklehurst
Mabane, William
Smiles, Lieut.-Col. sir Walter D.


Fleming, Edward Lascelles
MacAndrew, Lieut.-Col. C. G. (Partick)
Smith, Sir Robert (Ab'd'n & K'dine, C.)


Flint, Abraham John
MacAndrew, Major J. O. (Ayr)
Somerville, Annesley A. (Windsor)


Foot, Dingle (Dundee)
MacDonald, Rt. Hn. J. R. (Seaham)
Soper, Richard


Foot, Isaac (Cornwall, Bodmin)
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Southby, Commander Archibald R. J.


Fox Sir Gifford
McEwen, Captain J. H. F.
Spencer, Captain Richard A.


Fraser Captain Sir Ian
McKeag, William
Spender-Clay, Rt. Hon. Herbert H.


Galbraith, James Francis Wallace
McKle, John Hamilton
Spens, William Patrick


Ganzoni Sir John
McLean, Major Sir Alan
Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Fylde)


Gilmour Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
McLean, Dr. W. H. (Tradeston)
Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'morland)


Gluckstein Louis Halle
Macquisten, Frederick Alexander
Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)


Goff Sir Park
Makins, Brigadier-General Ernest
Stewart, William J. (Belfast, S.)


Goodman Colonel Albert W.
Mallalieu. Edward Lancelot
Stones, James


Gower Sir Robert
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Stourton, Hon. John J.


Granvi'lle Edgar
Manningham-Buller, Lt.-Col. Sir M,
Strauss, Edward A.


Grattan Doyle Sir Nicholas
Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir Murray F.


Grigg,Sir Edward
Marsden, Commander Arthur
Summersby, Charles H.


Grimston R. V.
Martin, Thomas B.
Sutcliffe, Harold


Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E.
Mayhew, Lieut.-Colonel John
Tate, Mavis Constance


Guinness Thomas L. E. B.
Mills, Sir Frederick (Leyton, E.)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Hales Harold K.
Mills, Major J.D (New Forest)
Thomas, James P. L. (Hereford)


Hamilton, Sir Geroge (llford)
Milne, Charles
Thomson, Sir James D. W.


Hamilton, Sir R. W.(Orkney & Zetl' nd)
Mitchell, Harold P.(Br'tf'd & Chisw'k)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess, of


Hammersley, Samuel S.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Todd, A. L. S. (Kingswinford)


Hanbury, Cecil
Molson, A. Hugh Elsdale
Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.


Harris, Sir Percy
Monsell, Rt. Hon. Sir B. Eyres
Wallace, Captain D. E. (Hornsey)


Hartington, Marquess of
Moreing, Adrian C.
Ward. Lt.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)


Harvey, Major Sir Samuel (Totnes)
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Ward, Irene Mary Bewick (Wallsend)


Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)
Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univer'ties)
Wardlaw-Milne, Sir John S


Headlam, Lieut.-Col. Cuthbert M.
Munro, Patrick
Watt, Major George Steven H.


Herbert, Capt. S. (Abbey Division)
Nation, Brigadier-General J. J. H.
Wayland Sir William A.


Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Nicholson, Godfrey (Morpeth)
Wedderburn, Henry James Scrymgeour-


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Nicholson, Rt. Hn. W. G. (Petersf'ld)
White, Henry Graham


Hope, Capt. Hon. A, O. J. (Aston)
Nunn, William
William, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Hore-Bellsha, Leslie
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Williams, Herbert G. (Croydon, S.)


Hornby, Frank
Ormsby Gore, Rt. Hon. William G. A.
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir Arnold (Hertf'd)


Horsbrugh, Florence
Orr Ewing, I. L.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Howitt, Dr. Alfred B.
Patrick, Colin M.
Wise, Alfred R.


Hunter, Dr. Joseph (Dumfries)
Peake, Osbert
Womersley, Sir Walter


Hunter, Capt. M. J. (Brigg)
Petherick, M.
Wood, Sir Murdoch McKenzie (Banff)


Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Worthington, Dr. John V.


Inskip, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas W. H.
Peto, Geoffrey K.(W'verh'pt'n,Bilston)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (S'V'noaks)


Jackson, Sir Henry (Wandsworth, C.)
Pybus, Sir John



Janner, Barnett
Raikes, Henry V. A. M.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Johnstone, Harcourt (S. Shields)
Ramsay, T. B. W. (Western Isles)
Sir George Penny and Sir Victor



Ramsbotham, Herwald
Warrender.




NOES.


Addlson, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Edwards, Charles
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)


Attlee Clement Richard
Gardner, Benjamin Walter
McEntee, Valentine L.


Banfield, John William
George, Major G. lloyd (Pembroke)
Maxton, James.


Batey, Joseph
Grenfell, David Rees (Glamorgan)
Parkinson, John Allen


Brown, C, W. E. (Notts., Mansfield)
Griffiths, George A, (Yorks,W.Riding)
Thorne, William James


Buchanan, George
Groves, Thomas E.
Tinker, John Joseph


Cleary, J. J.
Grundy, Thomas W.
Williams, Edward John (Ogmore)


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hall, George H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Williams, Dr. John H. (Llanelly)


Cripps, Sir Stafford
Jenkins, Sir William
Williams, Thomas (York, Don Valley)


Daggar, George
John, William
Wlimot, John


Davies, David L. (Pontypridd)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)



Davies, Rhys John (Weethoughton)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon, George
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Davies, Stephen Owen
Leonard, William
Mr. Paling and Mr. D. Graham.


Dobble, William
Lunn, William

HOUSING (SCOTLAND) BILL

Reported, with Amendments, from the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills.

Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Minutes of Proceedings to be printed.

Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be considered upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 76.]

BILLS REPORTED.

ASCOT DISTRICT GAS AND ELECTRICITY BILL.

Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

BRISTOL TRAMWAYS BILL [Lords].

Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

BOGNOR GAS AND ELECTRICITY BILL.

Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Bill, as amended, to lie upon the Table.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to,

Northern Ireland Land Purchase (Winding Up) Bill,

Ross and Cromarty (Dornie Bridge) Order Confirmation Bill, without Amendment.

That they have passed a Bill, intituled, An Act to make provision for the application of the enactments relating to diseases of animals as respects poultry; to amend those enactments; to provide for the regulation of the manufacture, sale, and importation of certain therapeutic substances capable of being used for veterinary purposes; to extend Part I of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Act, 1919, to Scotland; and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid." [Diseases of Animals Bill [Lords].

Orders of the Day — GOVERNMENT OF INDIA BILL.

As amended, further considered [FOURTH DAY].

CLAUSE 302.—(Interpretation, etc.)

3.52 p.m.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA(Mr. Butler): I beg to move, in page 179, line 36, after "in," to insert "British."
This corrects what was a slight error. The definition of "existing Indian law" upon which this Amendment operates, must, of course, refer to British Indian law and could only be made by an authority in any territories for the time being comprised in British India.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 180, line 16, after "India," to insert "Burma and Aden."
The pensioners referred to in the Bill are or may be pensioners who have served not in India only, but in Burma or Aden. The definition of India is now given in this Clause, and the Amendment supplies a deficiency in the original draft of the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 180, line 31, to leave out "and."
This Amendment is to be taken with the following Amendment, which includes a number of other definitions. The definition of "taxation" includes the words "any tax or impost whether general, local or special," which had been excised in an earlier part of the Bill. The several railway definitions are a re-draft of the original definitions included in the Seventh Schedule to the Bill. There will also be introduced an Amendment under the name of my right hon. Friend to the Seventh Schedule, which we shall come to later. The definition has been revised in order to fit in exactly with different Clauses in the Bill relating to railways, and to put them in line with Item 20 of List 1, which we shall consider when we come to the Seventh Schedule.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made:

In page 180, line 32, at the end, insert:
taxation' includes the imposition of any tax or impost whether general or local or special, and 'tax' shall be construed accordingly;
'railway' includes a tramway not wholly within a municipal area;
'federal railway' does not include an Indian State railway but, save as aforesaid, includes any railway not being a minor railway;
'Indian State railway' means a railway owned by a State and either operated by the State or operated en behalf of the State otherwise than in accordance with a contract made with the State by or on behalf of the Secretary of State in Council, the Federal Government, the Federal Railway Authority, or any company operating a federal railway;
'minor railway' means a railway which is wholly situate in one unit and does not form a continuous line of communication with a federal railway, whether of the same gauge or not; and
'unit' means a Governor's Province, a Chief Commissioner's Province or a Federated State."— [Mr.Butler].

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 180, after the words last inserted, to insert:
(3) No Indian State shall, for the purpose of any reference in this Act to Federated States, be deemed to have become a Federated State until the establishment of the Federation, unless the context of the reference otherwise requires.
This makes plain what has always been intended, and, indeed, is obvious, that a State cannot within the meaning of the Bill, be a Federated State unless and until the Federation of which it is a member has come into being. There is an Amendment to the proposed Amendment in the name of the hon. Baronet the Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto) to leave out the words "unless the context of the reference otherwise requires." I am advised by the draftsman whom I have consulted that these words are very often added to an Interpretation Clause, and it is regarded as better to leave them there. I asked whether they were absolutely necessary, and I understood that it would be wiser to leave them. They do not detract from the strength of the Clause, but they are words which are evidently the joy of the draftsmen and are usually put in Interpretation Clauses. It will be wrong for the House to exaggerate their importance, and they do not detract from the general sense of the new Sub-section. I am prepared to look into them before the Bill reaches another place in order
to as certain whether the words "Federated States" actually does occur in other parts of the Bill, and I would ask the House to leave these words in the Amendment in the meantime.

3.56 p.m.

Mr. CHURCHILL: It seems to me that these words are utterly meaningless.

Sir BASIL PETO: On a point of Order. May I have, the opportunity of moving the Amendment to the proposed Amendment standing in my name before the right hon. Gentleman addresses the House?

Mr. SPEAKER: Just as the hon. Member likes.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I am not excluding my hon. Friend. On the contrary, the procedure enables the point to be ventilated on two separate occasions: first on the general question, and, second, after the Amendment to the proposed Amendment in my hon. Friend's name has been moved. Although I am anxious not to stand in his way or in any way to lengthen the proceedings, I should like to conclude the very brief remarks I was going to make before we come to the more direct and serious issue which the Amendment to the proposed Amendment raises. I want to know what the words of the Government's Amendment can possibly mean. How can any State be deemed to have become a Federated State unless a Federation has been established? I suppose that the Government are contemplating that they will erect the States into the Federation one by one. All the force and power of the Executive here and in India will be concentrated on the Indian States in an intensive manner one after another, like we sometimes see the agents from many parts of the country employed in a by-election. Then when gradually a certain number of these States have been, as it were, fixed, settled, brought into the group, the Secretary of State for India or my right hon. Friend, in whatever office he may then be occupying, will be watching anxiously the barometer rising. Every month these intensive methods will have enabled another State to become a Federated State pending the establishment of Federation, and then, as the number approaches the 50 per cent. limit the excitement will be really quite intense. No one knows how long will intervene before this period is reached,
but one can imagine the feelings of emotion which will arise in the Government up to this level.
I gather that no State which has agreed to Federate will be allowed to—may I say—rat—to go back on its decision to secede. [An HON. MEMBER: "Resile."] Let us use the peculiar terminology of this Bill and say that no State will be allowed to resile. Indeed, the excitement would be almost intolerable if some were being added at one end and others were dropping out at the other end. One can imagine propaganda being attempted on both sides, and that while one body of gentlemen in India possessed of great official power will be putting the greatest pressure on the States to come in to make the 50 per cent. quota, other gentlemen will be advising them most strongly to stay out. Consequently, we may believe that this period will be a very lengthy one, possibly lasting four or five years before the actual majority has been scraped together, and the desire of the Princes to enter Federation has become fully manifest to the world. It seems to me a very reasonable thing—indeed, only a reasonable reassurance—that when a State has agreed to be a Federated State it shall not be deemed to be Federated unless the whole deal goes through. I think that is very natural, and what I want to know is why should there be any exception to the rule—
unless the context of the reference otherwise requires.
The only explanation given by the Under-Secretary was when he said that it was for the joy of the draftsmen. Far be it from me, or for any of my friends, to wish to withhold from a laborious, faithful and most competent body of public servants any meed of satisfaction, any personal indulgence in draught-refreshing liquid which their exertions may lead them to require, and to which their character certainly entitles them. All the same, when the Bill at this stage is definitely leaving our control cumbered with the addition of words to which no explanation can be assigned, except the one which has been given, and for which there is no justification except this desire to indulge the draftsmen, I do trust that the Government will not insist upon these words. If on reflection in another place they find that they are absolutely necessary, there is the place to insert them. We really cannot use a serious vehicle
like this India Bill merely for distributing fleeting pleasurable emotions among our public officials, and I hope that the Government will not persist in these words.

4.5 p.m.,

Sir B. PETO: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 3, to leave out:
unless the context of the reference otherwise requires.
The right hon. Member for Epping (Mr. Churchill) has covered the whole ground in words infinitely happier and more humorous than any I can use, but there are some serious aspects, and one is that as the Under-Secretary said that he was going to consider the necessity for the retention of these words carefully before the Bill reaches another place, we are really countenancing the insertion of words in a Bill for which he can give no explanation or rather no substantial reason. If the argument is merely that of adding to the joy of the draftsman, there is a hope in another place of correcting our somewhat foolish step of putting these words into the Bill. I do not deny the enormous value of another place in being able to correct errors of all sorts but when I have actually put upon the Order Paper an Amendment to take out these words, arid when we have heard from the Under-Secretary that they really have no meaning so far as the Bill is concerned, I think it is rather asking too much of the House to ask us to leave them in the Bill in the hope that somewhere else they may be corrected. This is the Interpretation Clause—a very important Clause—and in Sub-section (1) there is the definition of an Indian State very clearly set out, but I notice that the Government do not attempt to put in a definition of a Federated State. On the other hand the Under-Secretary has just moved a new Sub-section which says:
No Indian State
that is, of course, an Indian State as defined in Sub-section (1)—
shall, for the purpose of any reference in this Act to Federated States, be deemed to have become a Federated State until the establishment of the Federation.
We have no definition of "Federated State." No doubt it is mentioned frequently in the Bill, and therefore the natural thing would have been to have had a definition not only of an Indian
State but of a Federated State. Probably to avoid the difficulty of doing that, they give us one guiding rule which says, in the words of the Amendment, that it is not to be deemed a Federated State until the establishment of the Federation. If it ended there, we should know where we stood—that until Federation was established there was no such thing as a Federated State. Then we come to the mysterious words:
unless the context of the reference otherwise requires.
They cast a doubt on the whole matter as to whether there is any meaning at all in the new Sub-section (3), because if we have to search for every case when there is a reference to a Federated State, the ingenuity of someone might lead him to say that in that particular case there could be a Federated State before the establishment of federation, then I do not think it is worth while putting the words in at all.
Therefore, on these grounds I would beg the Government at this stage to leave out these words which are in the Bill not for any admirable reason given by the Under-Secretary but that the only reason they were put there was because in many other cases they had been found of some real use, and, that the words were dear to the hearts of the draftsmen. I do not think we can attach a great deal of importance to that. The question is whether in this particular case it is conceivable that they can add anything or clarify the position in any way, or only leave us in doubt as to what "Federated State" means in the Bill.

4.10 p.m.

Mr. EMMOTT: I beg to second the Amendment.
Almost everything that can be said on this Amendment was said by my right hon. Friend the Member for Epping (Mr. Churchill), and what little else there was to be said was said by my hon. Friend the Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto). There therefore remains little for any hon. Member who desires to second the Amendment. Nevertheless, I should like to add a word or two. It is obvious from the very candid remarks of the Under-Secretary that he could not, by the light of nature or of his own intellect, discover any justification for these words. Obviously, he went to the draftsman and
said, "Now what do these words mean?" or "What is the effect of them?" and the draftsman said, "Well, we always insert them in such Clauses." But mere precedent is no justification for them. No real reason was offered by the Under-Secretary. I think that it is a great mistake to insert in an Act of Parliament words of this nature, which are of uncertain intention and meaning. In the past, such expressions have offered great difficulty to those who are charged with the duty of interpreting Acts of Parliament. They are a type of words which afford employment to gentlemen of the long robe, but the primary purpose of the Bill is not, I understand, to give work to lawyers. That may be one of its subsidiary effects, but the primary purpose of the Government is not to afford employment to lawyers. I certainly think that this phrase, for which no real justification except that of precedent has been offered to the House, should be omitted from the Clause.

4.13 p.m.

Sir STAFFORD CR I PPS: I would like to ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney-General whether he agrees that these words ought to be in or ought to be out? I understand that it is one of the prime functions of the Law Officer to advise His Majesty's Government as regards the best form in which a Bill should be placed before the House so far as the draftsmanship is concerned. Apparently, during the cross-examination of the draftsman by the Under-Secretary, on behalf of the Government, he was unable to elicit any satisfactory explanation for such words. There is always a tendency to adhere to traditional form in draftsmanship, words very often being put in just because they have always been used before. Originally words were put in a Statute for some quite good purpose, because there is an exception in a case where an interpretation does not apply universally. The words are pat into the next Statute, where there may be an exception, or they get put into a Statute where there is not an exception. They hang on because they are traditional, and not because they are justified. We all have experience of the liability of draftsmen to hang on to traditional forms. I did not appreciate what the Under-Secretary told us, that it gave draftsmen some sort of aesthetic pleasure.
I think it was due to their not liking to depart from precedent. I would ask the learned Attorney-General whether they have any meaning, and, if not, I would ask the Government to omit them. If the right hon. Gentleman can point to any Clause in the Bill where these words might operate so as to affect the interpretation in a different way from that in which the interpretation Clause would operate with their omission there may be good ground for leaving them in.

4.16 p.m.

The SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Sir Samuel Hoare): If the inclusion of these words has done nothing else it has stimulated a very important Debate and has given my right hon. Friend the Member for Epping (Mr. Churchill) the opportunity of making an eloquent, impressive and moving speech on this all-important question. Hon. Members on all sides of the House are grateful to him for his intervention. Upon this last day of the Report stage I should like, for once, to find myself in agreement with him, and therefore I feel sorely tempted—

Mr. CHURCHILL: To yield.

Sir S. HOARE: —to accept his proposition, particularly when it is supported by an equally weighty speech from the acting Leader of the Labour party and an eloquent appeal by my hon. Friend' the Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto). In these circumstances I can take no other course than to accept the Amendment—with this reservation, that if it is found that in dashing this cup of bliss from the lips of the draftsman we are acting rashly or prematurely I shall have to ask the Government to take the necessary action in another place. With that reservation I am prepared to accept the appeal which has been made to me from all quarters of the House.

4.18 p.m.

Mr. HERBERT WILLIAMS: Before the Secretary of State comes to a final conclusion, I would ask him to read the first two lines at the top of page 5 of the Bill—Clause 6, Sub-section (7)—because there is there a definition of a Federated State:
In this Act a State which has acceded to the Federation is referred to as a Federated State.
A State which has acceded to the Federation is defined in Clause 6, Sub-section (1) in this way:
A State shall be deemed to have acceded to the Federation if His Majesty had signified his acceptance of an Instrument of Accession executed by the Ruler.
Those Instruments of Accession have to be executed, so far as 51 per cent. are concerned, before the Federation comes into being, and therefore the words "Federated State" have a meaning, though there is no Federation, which leads me to the conclusion that the words in Sub-section (7) of Clause 6 are an unsatisfactory definition because the words "Federated State" have two meanings. There is the meaning before the Federation comes into being and there is the meaning afterwards, and even those which have acceded before the Federation fall into two classes, because Sub-section (2) provides that the accession may be conditioned on the Federation coming into being before a certain date. So there will be Federal States which have acceded without qualification and others which have acceded with a qualification that so many more have formed before a certain date. If the Federation never comes into being the one lot still remain technically as Federated States. In those circumstances I think we need a better definition than we have got and I think that even the Amendment of the hon. Baronet the Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto) is wrong, because it makes things even worse than in the Government's own proposal.

The ATTORNEY- GENERAL (Sir Thomas Inskip): The hon. Member for South Croydon (Mr. H. Williams) has made an eloquent speech about a Clause which we struck out of the Bill several days ago.

4.22 p.m.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: I shall not make a speech about a Clause which has been struck out of the Bill, but without wishing in any way to disturb the present state of harmony I should like to say that I think we shall be a little unkind this afternoon if we accept this Amendment. We all indulge in our own types of amusement, and why should not the draftsman be allowed to have this one little joy of having these words in the
Bill? I admit, of course, that we are in an extraordinarily interesting position in sticking phrases into a Bill simply for the purpose of giving joy to the draftsman, but, after all, it means very little and it does no one any harm. I do not see why the Government should make an alliance on this occasion with the right hon. Member for Epping (Mr. Churchill). If they are going into an alliance with him they might do it on some big thing which had real meaning and real effect. It may be, of course, that the Government fear a combination between my right hon. Friend and the hon. and learned Member for East Bristol (Sir S. Cripps), fear, perhaps, that they are going into co-operation on a joint dictatorship or something. For my part I entreat the Government to rely on the rank and file of their supporters in this House instead of on the various discordant elements and to stand by their draftsman who, after all, has served them very well on this Bill. Cannot we keep in these words, even if we do create a new Parliamentary precedent by doing something for the sake of giving joy to the drafts man? Why should not somebody get something out of it? After all, we are getting our joy out of it. The Noble Lady the Member for the Sutton Division (Viscountess Astor) certainly is, because she is always interrupting. Are we not getting joy out of it? Are we not finishing with the Bill on Derby Day? What could be a more perfect jest.
I have one question to ask the Government. In the second line of their Amendment there is the word "until," referring to the establishment of the Federation. I hate the idea of having to ask the Government questions which they cannot answer, but could they enlighten the House as to when they expect that date will be—the establishment of Federation Now that we have here the whole of the quintuplets, all in one lot, side by side, could not one of them answer that simple question? It is a big question and a matter of importance, but I am only asking them something which they must know and about which they must have made up their mind. Surely the House of Commons might be given that information. Unfortunately, three of them have spoken, or I was hoping that the largest of them might have given me the answer to this ques-
tion. I think that somehow or other, before we leave this interesting situation, that vital question might be answered.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment agreed to.

Amendment, as amended, agreed to.

CLAUSE 304.—(Executive Government.)

Amendment made: In page 182, line 10, leave out "in India," and insert "borne on the Indian establishment"—[Mr. Butler].

CLAUSE313.—(Executive authority of Burma.)

4.26 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 187, line 19, to leave out "in Burma," and to insert "borne on the Burma establishment."
On these Burma Clauses many of the arguments will be consequential upon the arguments used in the Indian section of the Bill. This Amendment is an exact replica of an Amendment which was moved to Clause 8, on page 6, line 10.I do not know whether the House would wish me to give a similar explanation to that which was given then. If any hon. Member wishes for an explanation of any of these Burma Amendments, perhaps he will ask me to furnish it.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE316.—(Discretionary functions of Governor.)

4.27 p.m.

Sir REGINALD CRADDOCK: I beg to move, in page 189, line 5, to leave out from "affairs," to "shall," in line 7.
This Amendment is designed to make a distinction between this Clause and the corresponding Clause relating to external affairs in the Indian section of the Bill. The Clause dealing with India gives the Governor-General a reserved power to administer external affairs, among other things, but excludes affairs connected with the Dominions from that reservation, leaving that part of what may be called the department of external affairs to be carried on by the Minister. It appears that here, in the case of Burma., the same proposal to give Dominion affairs into the charge of the Minister was just taken from the proposals for India. But there is an immense difference between the progress and experience of the people of India and the people of Burma. Indians have travelled, both
in the Dominions and various other parts of the world, and have for some years had some knowledge of Dominion affairs and their connection with the Empire, and therefore they are provided with experience for dealing with them. The Burmans, however, have no such experience. They travel very little and what provincial autonomy they have possessed has been exercised for a much shorter time. There is, therefore, I submit, a very good case in relation to Burma for keeping affairs connected with the Dominions in the hands of the Governor for some time to come. There is no reason why what is proposed for the Governor-General in India should be transferred exactly, with the same methods, to the new Government of Burma. There is no great resemblance between the Government of Burma and either the Government of India or the Government of any Indian Province. Burma is to be given larger powers, nevertheless, than an Indian Province, until Federation become effective.
It is a striking anomaly in the case of Burma that people who have so much less experience, and indeed less opportunity of acquiring responsibility, should be entrusted with larger power pending the establishment of Federation than will be in the hands of the more experienced Indians. There is very good reason for not being too precipitate in giving higher, and what will be central, powers to those inexperienced ministers. They have not had the same opportunities of making themselves acquainted with affairs outside their own country. An Indian may travel very little, but the number of Burmans whom you find settled in India is extremely small.

4.32 p.m.

Duchess of ATHOLL,: I beg to second the Amendment.
I am not sure if all hon. Members realise that the phrase "external affairs," which affairs will be reserved to the Governor, does not include Dominion affairs, that is, relations with Dominions and the Empire. That is a very important point to remember, and obviously means a very big diminution of the powers. Burma is likely to have many more dealings with the Dominions of the British Commonwealth than with foreign countries, and it is a very big power to leave in the hands of the
ministers of the future Burman Government.
My hon. Friend the Member for the English Universities (Sir R. Craddock), speaking out of his great experience, has made clear again to-day what I think he made abundantly clear last month, when we had a general discussion upon Burma, that the Burmans as a whole are considerably behind India in political development and. experience. If my memory does not mislead me, that fact was recognised by the Minister. Therefore, it seems a risky experiment to put this considerable power into the hands of the ministers of what at present is only a, Province of British India. Relations with the Dominions may often be of a delicate nature. We remember the great difficulties which existed for many years between the Government of India and the Government of South Africa, and the difficult and delicate negotiations which went on between those two Governments for a long time. There may easily be equally delicate negotiations in the future between Burma and the Dominions, and it does not seem necessary to give these powers straight away to Burman ministers. Nobody suggests that the Bill puts Burma in a position in which the Bill is intended to put Federated India. These powers could with advantage be omitted until Burma has been given an opportunity of showing that she has made good use of all the other powers given to her.

4.35 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: If we were to accept the Amendment, the effect of it would be to exclude relations between Burma and any part of His Majesty's Dominions from the purview of ministers in Burma, and we are unable to accept that suggestion. For some time the general understanding has been that Burma should have a Constitution on the same level as India. The then Secretary of State said in 1931:
The prospects of constitutional advance held out to Burma as a part of British India will not be prejudiced by this decision [in favour of separation]."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 20th January, 1931; col. 29, Vol. 247.]
It has throughout been the aim of the Government to fulfil that undertaking, and, taking into consideration the differences between the unitary form of government which Burma will possess, a combination of the powers of the Centre
and of the Provinces in India, as compared with the federal form of Constitution which India will have, we intend that Burmese ministers should have the same sort of powers.
Having decided, in the Indian portion of the, Bill, that the relations between India and the Dominions shall be within the purview of ministers, we cannot now accept an Amendment which would take from the control of Burmese ministers the important sort of negotiation to which the Noble Lady has referred. The Noble Lady said that in days gone by there had been difficult negotiations between, for example, India and South Africa. There are bound to be negotiations in the future, whether they be between India and other parts of the Empire or Burma and other parts of the Empire, and we consider that one of the best methods of achieving satisfactory results will be to let these autonomous governments of the future negotiate directly with members of the British Dominions. We believe that to be the more satisfactory method of regulating these questions, and, in view of the decision that Burma should receive a form of government similar to what we are giving India, I regret that we cannot accept the Amendment.

4.38 p.m.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT: In many respects Burma may be behind India in political development. There was a time when there were feeling and difficulty in Burma, but that feeling and that difficulty were allayed by the statements that were made by responsible Ministers in this House. Everybody knows that what we propose to do for Burma falls short of many of the demands which were made by those who represented Burma at the Joint Select Committee and the Round Table Conference, but I am sure that the adoption of the Amendment would give rise to the charge of bad faith, with the result that there would be a very unfortunate atmosphere in which to start the new Constitution.

4.40 p.m.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: I would like to ask the Under-Secretary of State the meaning of the words "His Majesty's dominions" in this context. The word "dominions" is spelt with a small "d." The Noble Lady referred to the Dominions as the other parts of the
British Commonwealth. I think its meaning is wider than that. Spelt with a small "d" I think it includes the whole of the British Empire and the whole of the Crown Colonies, as well as Southern Rhodesia, which is between a Dominion and a Crown Colony. I want to know whether the meaning goes further than that. Does it include the mandated territories, or only some of them? Palestine is still under a class "A" mandate, on the assumption that Palestine will be art independent sovereign State, and we treat Palestine as a foreign country. Tanganyika is another territory which might have negotiations with both India and Burma, and it is held under a Class "B" mandate, which means that for all time she has to be with us, although she is debarred from giving us a preference. Another mandated territory which I can see might come into negotiation with parts of the Dominions is what used to be called German South-West Africa and which is under mandate "C," under which it is an integral part, for customs and for all purposes, with the Union of South Africa.
We have three classes of mandated territory, all of which might conceivably come into negotiation with India or Burma. If the word "dominions" is used in the widest possible sense—I think the only Statute in which this point is dealt with is in the Import Duties Act, where there is a definition of them as territories to which preferences apply, but so far as I can find out there is no definition of the word in the Bill—we ought to have a definition, in speech, and later, if necessary, as an addition to the Interpretation Clause so that no possible doubt will arise in the future.

4.42 p.m.

Sir B. PETO: The hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Isaac Foot) seemed to think that we are bound by virtue of a pledge given to the Burmans—that if they decided not to come into the Federation, they would not have a form of government inferior to that which they would have had on entering the Federation. We are bound to see that the Burmans have as good a government if they do not enter the Federation as if they do. I am informed by my hon. Friends that had Burma been a member of the old Federation, all negotiations with reference to external affairs, including relations with arty other part of
His Majesty's Dominions, would have been in the hands of the Federal Government. Therefore, they would not have been in the hands of the Burmans. If that be so, have we not to consider what is best for the Burmans, and what should be reserved to the Governor as are other matters in the Clause? I do not think anyone with experience of Burma has any doubt as to what is in the best interests of good government in Burma and of the smooth running of that government when it comes to relations or negotiations with other parts of His Majesty's Dominions.
It would be very much better for the Burmans if such negotiations, or whatever they may be, were in the hands of the Governor rather than of Burmese Ministers. What right have we to consider only the literal interpretation of the pledge which was given, so that there might be no accusation of bad faith? I do not think we have to consider that. We have to consider what is the right interpretation of that pledge, and we should undoubtedly be giving a better government to Burma if the Amendment were in than if it were out. These things would be better managed by the Governor than by Burmese Ministers at present, and the Government ought to accept the Amendment. I put that view before the Government. I want them to take a wide view of this matter, and not to consider themselves bound by every dot on the "i" and every cross on every "t" of certain words, and therefore precluded from doing what they think is best. Surely, we ought to do what we think is best in the interests of the Burmese and of Burma itself.
Most critical negotiations are going on at the moment between Abyssinia and Italy. When representatives had to be appointed to a committee of four to consider certain questions it was not two Abyssinians who were put on there, but two people of another nationality. That has a certain bearing on this question. Surely these delicate affairs are better left in the hands of more experienced people than the Burmese themselves. Therefore, I shall support my hon. Friend, in spite of what has been said from the Treasury Bench.

4.46 p.m.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: My hon. Friend the Member for South Croydon (Mr. H. Williams) raised the question whether the expression "His Majesty's
dominions," spelled with a, small "d," includes mandated territories. The answer is that it does not. The effect of the Amendment would be to remove from the scope of the Ministers' duties the important sphere of inter-Imperial relations. If Burmese Ministers desired to arrange some trade agreement in respect of a mandated territory, they would presumably make their agreement with that part of the Empire to which the mandated territory was entrusted. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State has given reasons why it is impossible to accept the Amendment, and I merely rose to refer

to the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for South Croydon.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: Does it apply to a protectorate?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I should not like to answer that question off-hand, but I rather think the phrase "His Majesty's dominions" does include protectorates.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 233; Noes, 33

Ropner, Colonel L.
Soper, Richard
Wardlaw-Mline, Sir John S.


Rosbotham, Sir Thomas
Southby, Commander Archibald R. J
Warrender, Sir Victor A. G.


Runge, Norah Cecil
Spencer, Captain Richard A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Spender-Clay, Rt. Hon. Herbert H.
Wait, Major George Steven H.


Rutherford, Sir John Hugo (Liverp'l)
Spens, William Patrick
White, Henry Graham


Salmon, Sir Isldore
Stewart, J. Henderson (File, E.)
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)

Samuel, Sir Arthur Michael (F'nham)
Stourton, Hon. John J.
Williams, Edward John (Ogmore)


Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, North)
Williams, Dr. John H. (Llanelly)


Samuel, M. R. A. (Wds'wth, Putney)
Sueter, Bear-Admiral Sir Murray F.
Williams, Thomas (York., Don Valley)


Sandys, Duncan
Summersby, Charles H.
Wllmot, John


Savery, Servington
Sutclffle, Harold
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir Arnold (Hertt'd)


Shaw, Helen B. (Lanark, Bothwell)
Tate, Mavis Constance
Wlndsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Shaw, Captain William T. (Forfar)
Thomas, James P. L. (Hereford)
Womersley, Sir Walter


Shepperson, Sir Ernest W.
Thomson, Sir James D, W.
Wood, Sir Murdoch McKenzle (Band)


Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Thorne, William James
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (S'v'noaks)


Smlies, Lieut.-Col. Sir Walter D.
Tinker, John Joseph
Young, Ernest J. (Middlesbrough, E.)


Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of



Smith, Sir Robert (Ab'd'n & K'dlne.C.)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Somervell, Sir Donald
Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.
Lieut.-Colonel Sir A. Lambert Ward


Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Ward, Irene Mary Bewick (Wallsend)
and Captain Hope.




NOES.


Allen. Lt.-Col. Sir William (Armagh)
Davison, Sir William Henry
Nunn, William


Atholl, Duchess of
Erskine-Bolst, Capt. C. C. (Blackpool)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Beaumont, M. W. (Bucks. Aylesbury)
Goodman, Colonel Albert W.
Peto, Sir Basil E. {Devon, Barnstaple)


Broadbent, Colonel John
Hunter, Capt. M. J. (Brigg)
Reid, David D. (County Down)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks.,Newb'y)
Keyes, Admiral Sir Roger
Somerville, Annesley A (Windsor)


Browne, Captain A. C.
Kimball, Lawrence
Todd, Lt.-Col. A. J. K. (B'wick-on-T.)


Burnett, John George
Knox, Sir Alfred
Wayland, Sir William A.


Carver, Major William M.
Lennox-Boyd, A. T.
Williams, Herbert G. (Croydon, S.)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Levy, Thomas
Wise, Alfred R.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)



Craddock, Sir Reginald Henry
Marsden, Commander Arthur
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Mellor, Sir J. S. P.
Mr. Emmott and Mr. Raikes.

CLAUSE 325.—(Conduct of business of Government.)

4.55 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 193, line 2, to leave out "the making thereof was not duly authorised," and to insert:
it is not an order or instrument made or executed by the Governor.

This corresponds to the Amendment on Clause 17, page 10, line 42, in the Indian part of the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 334.—(Disqualifications for membership.)

Mr. BUTLER: ; I beg to move, in page 197, line 33, to leave out "a period exceeding twelve months," and to insert "not less than two years."

This and the next Amendment are consequential on Clause 26.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 197, line 37, at the end, insert:
,(f) if, having been nominated as a candidate for the Legislature or having acted as an election agent of any person so nominated, he has failed to lodge a return of election expenses within the time and in the manner required by any Order in Council made under this Act or by any Act of the Legislature, unless five years have elapsed from the date by which the return
ought to have been lodged or the Governor acting in his discretion has removed the disqualification:
Provided that a disqualification under paragraph (I) of this sub-section shall not take effect until the expiration of one month from the date by which the return ought to have been lodged or of such longer period as the Governor acting in Iris discretion may in any particular case allow."—[Mr. Butler.]

CLAUSE 336.—(Privilege, etc. of members.)

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 199, line 6, to leave out from "or," to "any," in line 10.

These Amendments also are consequential.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 199, line 14, leave out lines 14 to 18, and insert:
(4) Provision may be made by an Act of the Legislature for the punishment, on conviction before a court, of persons who refuse to give evidence or produce documents before a committee of a chamber when duly required by the chairman of the committee so to do:
Provided that any such Act shall have effect subject to such rules for regulating the attendance before such committees of persons who are, or have been, in the service of the Crown in India or Burma, and safeguarding confidential matter from disclosure= as may be made by the Governor exercising his indivdual judgment."—[Mr. Butler.]

CLAUSE340.—(Restrictions on discussionin, Legislature.)

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 201, line 10, to leave out "performance of his judicial functions," and to insert "discharge of his duties."

This corresponds to an Amendment on Clause 40.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE342.—(Extent of laws of Legislature.)

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 201, line 37, to leave out "belonging to," and to insert "vested in."
This brings the wording of the Clause into line with the similar expression elsewhere.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 343.—(Savings.)

Amendment made: In page 202, line 23, after "Family," insert "or the succession to the Crown."—[Mr. Butler.]

CLAUSE 345.—(Previous sanction of Governor required for certain legislative proposals.)

Amendment made: In page 203, line 25, at the end, insert:
(f)subjects persons not resident in Burma to greater taxation than persons resident in Burma or subjects companies not wholly controlled and managed in Burma to greater taxation than companies wholly controlled and managed therein; or."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 352.—(Power of Governor in certain cases to enact Acts.)

Amendment made: In page 208, line 9, leave out from "and," to "enact," in line 13, and insert:
either—

(a)enact forthwith, as a Governor's Act, a Bill containing such provisions as he considers necessary; or
(b)attach to his message a draft of the Bill which lie considers necessary.
(2) Where the Governor takes such action as is mentioned in paragraph (b) of the preceding sub-section, he may at any time after the expiration of one month."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 353.—(British subjects domiciled in the United Kingdom and British India.)

Amendment made: In page 209, line 2, leave out "similar," and insert "like." —[Sir S. Hoare.]

Consequential Amendment made.

CLAUSE 355.—(Companies.)

5.3 p.m.

Sir S. HOARE: I beg to move, in page 210, line 34, after "shares," to insert "stock."

5.4 p.m.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: May we have some light shed on this question—as well as on the general affairs of the House? In asking the Government to give some explanation of this, may I also ask you, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, whether we can have a little light in the Chamber or if candles can be brought in, if the hon. Member prefers that phrase

Mr. BUTLER: These Clauses, if amended, will correspond exactly to Clauses 113 and 114 and the insertion of the word "stock" brings the Burman and Indian Clauses into harmony. The reason why the Amendments are different from those in the Indian Clauses is that most of these words relating to the Burma Clause were put in on the Committee stage before they were put in for India.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 210, line 38, after "on," insert "or proposing to carry on."—[Sir S. Hoare.]>

Sir S. HOARE: I beg to move, in page 210, line 40, after "company," to insert:
or the situation of its registered office, or the currency in which its capital or loan capital is expressed.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: May we have a little explanation of this Amendment? This is a rather wider question and raises the subject of the situation of a registered office. It may happen that there are two registered offices, and I should like to know whether any difficulty would arise in that way. The Amendment goes on to deal with the question of the currency in which a company's capital or loan capital is expressed, and I am sure the Government would like to give us some explanation of it.

5.6 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL(Sir Donald Somervell): I am surprised that my hon. Friend who is such a diligent attender at these Debates has not observed the two previous explanations which have been given to the Committee on this point. It was originally raised by the hon. Member for Doncaster (Mr.
Molson) who suggested that among the list of matters which should not be allowed to be made a basis of discriminatory legislation should be the place of the registered office and the currency in which the accounts of the company were kept. I then promised that we would give it consideration because it seemed reasonable that these matters should be added. We added them to the list so far as India is concerned on the Report stage, on one of the earlier days, and this is merely bringing the Burma Clause into line with the India Clause.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: This is really carrying out a pledge which was given?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: The point was raised originally on the India Clause and the appropriate words were inserted there. This is bringing the corresponding Burma Clause into line with the India Clause. As the hon. Member attaches such importance to accuracy, I am sure that he would not expect me to accept the word "pledge" in a context where it did not exactly apply.

Amendment agreed to.

Two consequential Amendments made.

Amendments made: In page 211, line 13, after "from," insert "or preferential treatment in respect of."

In line 15, leave out "paragraph (b) of."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

Eight consequential Amendments made.

CLAUSE359.—(Professional and technical qualifications in general.)

Amendment made: In page 215, line 27, leave out Sub-section (1).—[The Attorney-General.]

Sir S. HOARE: I beg to move, in page 216, line 6, at the end, to insert:
(2) The Governor shall not give his sanction for the purposes of the preceding sub-section unless he is satisfied that the proposed legislation is so framed as to secure that no person 'who, immediately before the coming into Operation of any disability, liabilty, restriction, or condition to be imposed by or under that legislation, was lawfully practising any profession, carrying on any occupation, trade, or business, or holding any office in Burma shall, except in so far as may be necessary in the interests of the public, be debarred from continuing to practise that profession, carry on that occupation, trade, or business, or hold that office, or from doing anything in the course of that profession, occupation, trade or business or in the discharge of the duties of that office
which he could lawfully have done if that disability, liability, restriction, or condition had not come into operation.
(3) All regulations made under the provisions of any law of Burma which prescribe the professional or technical qualifications which are to be requisite for any purpose in Burma, or impose by reference to any professional or technical qualification, any disability, liability, restriction or condition in regard to the practising of any profession, the carrying on of any occupation, trade, or business or the holding of any office in Burma shall, not less than four months before they are expressed to come into operation, be published in such manner as may be required by general or special directions of the Governor, and if within two months from the date of the publication complaint is made to him that the regulations or any of them will operate unfairly as against any class of persons affected thereby, then, if he is of opinion that the complaint is well founded, he may, at any time before the regulations are expressed to come into operation, by public notification disallow the regulations or any of them.
In this sub-section the expression "regulations" includes rules, byelaws, orders and ordinances.
In the discharge of his functions under this sub-section the Governor shall exercise his individual judgment.
(4)If the Governor exercising his individual judgment by public notification directs that the provisions of the last preceding sub-section shall apply in relation to any existing Indian or Burman law those provisions shall apply in relation to that law accordingly.

5.9 p.m.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: May I suggest that here is a chance for the Government to explain this somewhat long addition to the Clause. No doubt some explanation has been given before, but this does cover a rather large number of questions in connection with Burma. I presume that it brings the law for Burma into relation with the law for India; but these clearly cannot be consequential words in the ordinary sense, and I think the House might be given some explanation.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: The hon. Member is right in surmising that this Clause is moved in conformity with the corresponding Indian Clause. If he is in doubt and he has an annotated edition of the Bill up to date, he will find the corresponding Amendment in Clause 118. He will find that Sub-section (2) deals with certain safeguards in regard to people who are carrying on a profession or calling at the present time. He will find in Sub-section (3) that provision is
made for regulations which have to be published in a particular way, and there is a definition of regulations; and Subsection (4) provides for certain precautions by the Governor-General in connection with these safeguards for people carrying on their profession.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 360.—(Medical qualifications.)

Amendment made: In page 217, line 29, after "any," insert "liability, disability."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 367.—(Annual financial statement.)

Amendment made: In page 220, line 34, leave out "of the personal and secretarial staffs of the Governor."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 371.—(Special provisions as to financial Bills.)

Amendment made: In page 223, line 1, leave out "authorising," and insert "regulating."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 374.—(Auditor-General of Burma.)

Amendment made: In page 224, line 38, at end, insert:
and the salaries, allowances and pensions payable to or in respect of members of his staff shall he paid out of those revenues."—[Sir S. Hours.]

CLAUSE 377.—(Executive authority in respect of railways to be exercised by Railway Board.)

Amendment made: In page 226, line 29, leave out from "perform," to "as" in line 30, and insert:
in regard to the construction, equipment and operation of railways, such functions for securing the safety both_ of members of the public and of persons operating the railways, including the 'holding of inquiries into the causes of accidents."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 378.—(Composition, etc., of Railway Board.)

Amendment made: In page 226, line 35, leave out "is for the time being," and insert "for the time being is or is acting as."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

Consequential Amendment made.

CLAUSE 379.—(Directions and principles to be observed by Railway Board.)

Amendment made: In page 227, line 35, at the end, insert:
If any dispute arises under this Subsection between the Government and the Board as to wheher a question is or is not a question of policy, the decision of the Governor in his discretion shall be final."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 381.—(Acquisition and sale of land by, and contracts and liabilities of, the Railway Board.)

Amendments made: In page 228, line 35, leave out "acquire that land," and insert "cause that land to be acquired."

In line 38, after "enforceable,"insert" by or."

In line 38, after "not," insert "by or."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 382.—(Finance of the Railway Board.)

Sir S. HOARE: I beg to move, in page 229, Line 19, to leave out "and interest and bonuses on."

5.13 p.m.

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: In dealing with this provident fund which is to be established, apparently by the Board, I should like to know from the Government what reasons there are for cutting out the words "and interest and bonuses on" in respect of these pensions. Whenever you establish a superannuation or pension fund interest must accrue to the fund, and there are occasions when the interest is so great in amount that the fund is capable of paying a bonus in addition to the pensions. It seems in this case that the fund might be deprived of something if these words are taken out of the Clause. [Interruption.] It is suggested now that the next Amendment does it, but it seems to me that the Under-Secretary is mistaken. The next Amendment refers to the transfer of certain moneys as between the revenues of India and Burma. I think we are entitled, especially in the case of a provident fund of this kind, to have some explanation as to why these words are to be deleted.

5.15 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I would not like to say that the hon. Member was gravely mistaken. At first sight it might appear that there was some grave difference between the words which were originally in the Bill and the new paragraph (c) which we are proposing to insert. The hon. Member will recollect that we made an
exactly similar Amendment to Clause [85, and there is a similar consequential Amendment in the same Clause. The purpose of the Clause is to secure a proper adjustment between the revenues of Burma and the Authority of the charges which are mentioned in the Amendment. These charges are in respect of certain persons appointed by the Secretary of State, and it seems fair that the revenues' of Burma should be reimbursed from the railway revenues in respect of such charges. The Amendment merely secures that this reimbursement shall be made. I do not think there is any ground for the fear that the hon. Member has, although, in view of the importance of the provident fund, I quite understand his raising the question.

5.17 p.m.

Mr. C. WI LL I A MS: It would be wrong to infer that the hon. Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Rhys Davies) is the only person who is interested in this matter of pensions. It is obvious to those of us who have tried to follow the Bill closely, whether we have been given annotated copies or not, that on this particular occasion the statement of the Under- Secretary clears up the whole position. There is not the least danger, as far as I can see, and I do not think anyone else will see any danger, to the people connected with the railways, whether on the one side or on the other.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 229, line 20, at the end, insert:
(c) paying to the revenues of Burma an amount equal to so much of any pensions and contributions to provident funds charged by this art of this Act on those revenues and so much of any pensions charged by this Act on the revenues of the Federation of India, as is attributable to service on rail- ways in Burma."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 383.—(Provisions as to certain obligations of the Railway Board.)

Amendment made: In page 230, line 33, at the end, insert:
(2) It shall be an obligation to the Board to repay to the Government any sums defrayed out of the revenues of Burma in respect of any debt, damages, costs or expenses in or in connection with any proceedings brought or continued by or against the Government of Burma or against the Secretary of State under Chapter X of this Part of this Act in respect of railways in Burma."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 385.—(Special provisions as to certain funds.)

5.19 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 231, line 13, to leave out Sub-section (2), and to insert:
(2) The Government of Burma shall credit the Board with interest on the amount from time to time deemed to be owing under sub-section (1) of this section at such rate as may from time to time be agreed between the Government and the Board or as may, in default of agreement be from time to be agreed between the Government and the Board or as may, in default of agreement be from time to time determined by the Governor in his discretion, and any interest so credited shall be treated as an addition to the sum deemed to be owing under the said sub-section.
I do not want to mislead the House. This is an Amendment which does not correspond exactly with the Indian Amendment, and therefore I want to give a short explanation with regard to it, in view of the understanding with the House. The Sub-section as it now stands makes it compulsory upon the Government to pay the Railway Board interest on account of the existing railway funds which are deemed to be owing by the Government to the Board. We consider that it would be undesirable to divorce the interest from the capital. If hon. Members will look at the words in the last two lines of the new Sub-section, they will see that those words ensure that the interest in question shall remain to the credit of the fund and earn further interest, and shall not be diverted to any other purpose either by the Government or by the Railway Board. These are the two objects of the Amendment, which is particular to the Burma chapter, and therefore I make special mention of it.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 389.—(Constitution of High Court.)

Amendment made: In page 233, line 5, at the end, insert:
Provided that a person shall not, unless he is, or when first appointed to judicial office was a barrister, a member of the Faculty of Advocates or an Advocate of the High Court, be qualified for appointment as chief justice of the High Court until he has served for not less than three years as a judge of the High Court."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 392.—(Jurisdiction of High Court.)

Amendment made: In page 234, leave out lines 28 to 34.—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 393.—(Administrative functions of High Court.)

Amendment made: In page 234, line 35, leave out "administrative."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

5.20 p.m.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 235, line 9, at the end, to insert:
(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed as giving to the High Court any jurisdiction to question any judgment of any inferior court which is not otherwise subject to appeal or revision.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: May I ask if this also is a similar Amendment? It raises a legal question—a question of jurisdiction—and I think it would be as well if we had a definite assurance in regard to it. We have not been told that it is consequential.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: This is what I may call a corresponding provision with regard to Burma. If the hon. Member wants the reference, he will find it in Clause 222. I then moved the Amendment, and explained that it was to prevent a court from quashing, as it is called, a judgment of another court with regard to which it has not jurisdiction.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 401.—(Control of Secretary of State with respect to conditions of service.)

Amendment made: In page 236, line 35, after "State," insert "acting with the concurrence of his advisers."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 407.—(Application of preceding section to railway services and officials of High Court.)

Amendment made: In page 240, line 36, after "salaries," insert "allowances, leave."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 409.—(Services recruited by the Secretary of State.)

Amendments made: In page 241, line 7, after "shall," insert "until Parliament otherwise determines."

In line 9, at the beginning, insert "Until Parliament otherwise determines."

In line 21, at the end, insert:
(4) It shall be the duty of the Governor to keep the Secretary of state informed as to the operation of this and the next succeeding section, and he may after the expiration of
such period as he thinks fits make recommendations for the modification thereof.

In discharging his functions under this sub-section, the Governor shall act in his disrcetion."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 410.—(Power of Secretary of State to make appointments to medical services, and posts in Burma.)

Amendment made: In page 241, line 22, at the beginning, insert "Until Parliament otherwise determines."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 411.—(Special provision as to irrigation.)

Amendments made: In page 241, line 25, leave out from the beginning, to "efficiency," in line 28, and insert:
Until Parliament otherwise determines, the Secretary of State may for the purpose of securing.

In line 29, leave out "he may."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 413.—(Conditions of service, pensions, etc., of persons recruited by Secretary of State.)

Amendments made: In page 242, line 23, after "service," insert "or a civil post."

In line 25, after "pensions," insert "and general rights in regard to medical attendance."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

5.25 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 242, line 42, at the end, to insert:
(2) Any promotion of any person appointed to a civil service or a civil post by the Secretary of State shall be made by the Governor, exercising his individual judgment.
(3) If any such person as aforesaid is suspended from office, his remuneration shall not, during the period of his suspension, be reduced except to such extent, if any, as may be directed by the Governor, exercising his individual judgment.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: I think we might have an explanation on this Amendment. No doubt we shall be told that it is to bring the Burma position into line with the Indian position, but I am not quite sure whether the words are exactly the same right through. I should like the Government to explain whether this is really identical in every detail, as believe it is.

Mr. BUTLER: This Amendment corresponds exactly with the Amendment which has already been made to Clause
244. In explaining that Amendment a day or two ago on (Report, I pointed out that we were not sure whether promotions were covered, and the object of the Amendment was to cover promotions.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 243, line 5, at the end, insert:
Provided that, if any such person is serving in connection with the railways in Burma, so much only of his salary and allowances shall be charged on the revenues of Burma as is not paid out of the Railway Fund."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 414.—(Rights in respect of complaints, appeals, etc.)

Amendment made: In line 33, leave out "in his discretion," and insert "exercising his individual judgment."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

Two consequential Amendments made.

CLAUSE 415.—(Compensation for altered conditions of service.)

Consequential Amendment made.

CLAUSE 418.—(District judges, etc.)

Amendments made: In page 246, line 40, leave out from "the," to the end of the Sub-section, and insert:
High Court shall be consulted before a recommendation as to the making of any such appointment is submitted to the Governor.

In page 247, line 5, leave out "is," and insert "has been for not less than five years."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

5.26 p.m.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 247, line 10, after the second "judge," to insert:
chief judge of the small cause court, Rangoon.'
I thought I would save my hon. Friend the Member for Torquay (Mr. C. Williams) trouble by pointing out in the first instance that this is a corresponding provision. It so happens that there is no other small cause court in Burma except that at Rangoon and, therefore, this Amendment is nottotidem, verbisthe same as the Indian Amendment, but to all intents and purposes it is the same.

Mr. ATTLEE: May we take it that there is no possibility of another small cause court being set up in Burma at any time?

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: May I be permitted most respectfully to thank my
right hon. and learned Friend for what he thought was saving me trouble; and may I take this opportunity of saying that of course it was quite obvious that this was one of the matters on which the Government were going to make an explanation? I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on the clarity with which he has made this particular explanation, as well as any other explanation that he has made during the whole course of the Bill.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: The hon. Gentleman opposite has asked me whether it is possible that another small cause court may some day be established in Burma. I ought to qualify what I have just said, because it was not wholly accurate to this extent: The small cause court at Rangoon is the only small cause court which is really worth speaking about. There are some small courts which are so insignificant as not to be worth including, for, as my hon. and learned Friend the Member for East Bristol (Sir S. Cripps) appreciates,de minimis non carat lex.If another small cause court is ever established, suitable provision will have to be made for it in respect of this Clause.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 423.—(Provisions as to certain persons serving in or before 1924.)

Amendment made: in page 249, line 20, at the end, insert:
Provided that if any such person as aforesaid is serving in connection with the railways in Burma, so much only of his salary and allowances shall be charged on the revenues of Burma as is not paid out of the Railway Fund."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 427.—(Power by Order in Council to transfer certain powers of Secretary of State.)

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, to leave out the Clause.

5.28 p.m.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: I think that, if we are going to leave out a Clause, we ought to have some explanation, because it can hardly be possible that the leaving out of this Clause, which is a very distinct one in itself, is a matter that is entirely covered by the fact that we are dealing with Burma. I feel sure that it is covered in some part of the Bill, but our pace has been so rapid that there
may be one or two Members of Parliament somewhere or other who do not know exactly where it is covered. Of course, it is not my job to inform them of the whole position in regard to every detail of the Bill, but I feel that some Member of the Government will be able to tell us, and save me the trouble of doing so.

Mr. BUTLER: The House will remember that we omitted the original Clause 251 from the Indian section of the Bill, substituting for it a new form of procedure. That Clause had to do with future appointments to the Secretary of State's Services, and with the possibility of an inquiry into the recruitment by the Secretary of State of the All-India Services after a certain date. The Committee decided to omit that Clause from the Bill, and different arrangements are now being substituted for that Clause in the Burma and Indian portions of the Bill. The omission of Clause 427 is consequential upon the omission of the similar Clause 251 from the Indian portion of the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 429.—(Functions of Public Service Commission.)

Amendment made: In page 252, line 34, at the end, insert:
(3) Nothing in this section shall require the Public Service Commission to be consulted, in the case of the subordinate ranks of the various police forces in Burma, as respects any of the matters mentioned in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of sub-section (2) of this section."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 432.—(Eligibility for office under the Crown in. Burma of persons who are not British subjects.)

Amendment made: In page 253, line 26, after "may," insert:
(a) declare that a native of any specified area in Burma (not being part of British Burma) or of any specified Indian State or territory adjacent to India shall be eligible to hold any civil office in or in connection with the affairs of Burma, being an office specified in the declaration;(b)."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 438.—(Provision as to existing Government property.)

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 256, line 8, to leave out Sub-section (2), and to insert:
(2) Any property which immediately before the commencement of this Part of
this Act was vested in His Majesty for the purposes of the government of India and either was then situate in Burma or, by virtue of any delegation from the Secretary of State in Council or otherwise, was then in the possession or under the control of, or held on account of, the Local Government of Burma, shall, as from the commencement of this Part of this Act, vest in His Majesty for the purposes of the government of Burma:
Provided that this sub-section does not apply in relation to any military equipment, stores, money, bank balances or other property held in connection with His Majesty's Indian forces stationed in Burma (not being forces raised in Burma).
(3)All credits and debits of the Local Government of Burma in account with the Governor-General of India in Council shall be deemed to be credits and debits of the government of Burma.
(4)Arrears of any taxes outstanding in Burma immediately before the commencement of this Part of this Act shall be deemed to be due to and may be recovered by the government of Burma.

5.32 p.m.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: May I ask a question on Sub-section (4).

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: If the hon. Member will perhaps read what is on the Paper he will see that it is not a case of taking any particular Sub-section; it is all one Amendment.

Mr. WLLLIAMS: I noticed that, but I thought that you put the Question "That Sub-section (2) stand part of the Bill." It is entirely my fault. I was confusing the position, but I wish to put my question on Sub-section (4). As far as
Arrears of any taxes outstanding in Burma immediately before the commencement of this Part of this Act 
are concerned, I should be glad if the Under-Secretary could say approximately the amount of the arrears at the present time. It is a relevant question, and I think that the Government must know the answer. We should be given some idea when we are transferring approximately what they are, and where they are. I do not press the Government if they are unable to give an answer, but it would seem to be a matter with which they should be able to deal. Also could my hon. Friend give some explanation of the credits and debits of the Government of Burma? I do not think that in any part of the Bill we have been given information of that kind.

Mr. BUTLER: I have no doubt that the Government of Burma will be able to
give an assessment of the amount of arrears of taxes outstanding. My hon. Friend cannot expect me to give him an accurate account of the amount of arrears of taxes outstanding at this Box this very minute.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Not approximately?

Mr. BUTLER: I do not doubt that if my hon. Friend were to make inquiries of the Government of Burma he could get a substantial answer from them. The need for Sub-section (4) follows upon a similar Sub-section inserted in the Indian portion of the Bill. It follows the principle of that Sub-section which allots uncollected arrears of taxation to the future taxing authority. If we did not insert it there would be a gap in. the Bill. I hope that the explanation satisfies my hon. Friend.

Mr. WILLIAMS: I apologise for asking my hon. Friend a question which he could not answer.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 256, line 19, after "property," insert "does not include any land or buildings but."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 439.—(Power to acquire property and to make contracts, etc.)

Amendment made: In page 256, line 35, at the beginning, insert:
Subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act with respect to the Railway Board."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 441.—(Rights and liabilities of Secretary of State in Council.)

Amendments made: In page 257, line 29, at the end, insert:
and references in any such contract to the Secretary of State in Council shall be construed accordingly.

In page 258, line 7, after "be," insert "deemed to be."[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 447.—(Power of Governor to issue Proclamations.)

Amendment made: In page 260, line 38, leave out from "months," to the end of line 40, and insert:
Provided that, if and so often as a resolution approving the continuance in force of such a proclamation is passed by both Houses of Parliament, the proclamation shall, unless revoked, continue in force for a further period of six months from the date on which under this sub-section it would otherwise have ceased to operate, but no such
proclamation shall in any case remain in force for more than three years."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 452.—(Persons not to be subjected to disability by reason of race, religion, etc.)

Amendments made: In page 263, line 5, after "from," insert "acquiring, holding or disposing of property or."

After the second "any," insert "occupation."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 453.—(Compulsory acquisition of land, etc.)

Amendments made: In page 263, line 24, leave out "land belonging to private persons," and insert:
any land or any commercial or industrial undertaking or any interest in, or in any company owning, any commercial or industrial undertaking.

In line 26, at the end, insert:
and either fixes the amount of the compensation, or specifies the principles on which, and the manner in which, it is to he determined.

In line 29, leave out "the rights of private persons," and insert "rights."

In line 38, at the end, insert "and undertaking' includes part of an undertaking."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 454.—(Protection of privileges in respect of land revenue.)

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 264, line 4, to leave out from "grant," to "made," in line 5, and to insert:
or confirmation of title of or to land, or of or to any right or privilege in respect to land or land revenue, being a grant or confirmation.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: This Amendment, which is largely legal, deals with a change of words. I conclude that this is again following the precept of some other part of the Bill, but may we be assured that, in all circumstances, the substitution of these words does not in any way weaken the position of the owners or occupiers of the land?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: On the contrary, the slight Amendment in respect of the land strengthens their position, and makes it entirely plain that no technical point can be taken as to what actually land includes.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: Is this not a thoroughly good Tory Amendment?

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 264, line 5, at the end, insert:
(2) No pension granted or customarily payable in Burma before the commencement of this Part of this Act by the Governor-General in Council or the Local Government of Burma on political considerations or compassionate grounds shall be discontinued or reduced, otherwise than in accordance with any grant or order regulating the payment thereof, save on an order of the Governor, exercising his individual judgment, and any sum required for the payment of any such pension shall be charged on the revenues of Burma."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 460.—(Procedure as respects proposals for amendment of certain provisions of Act and Orders in Council.)

Amendments made: In page 265, line 30, leave out "effect which the making of the proposed amendment," and insert:
proposed amendment and, in particular, as to the effect which it.

In line 34, at the end, insert:
In formulating any such statement of opinion the Governor shall act in his discretion.

In line 39, after "choosing," insert "or the qualifications of."

In page 266, line 4, after "time," insert "before or after the commencement of this Part of this Act."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 462.—(Power of His Majesty in Council to remove difficulties as respects Burma.)

Amendment made: In page 267, line 26, at the end, insert:
''(2) No Order in Council shall be made under this section after the expiration of six months from the commencement of this Part of this Act."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 464.—(Interpretation.)

Amendment made: In page 269, line 12, at the end, insert:
(3) Any reference in this Part of this Act to Acts of Parliament shall be construed as including a reference to any Order in Council made under Part XII of this Act for making in any such Act adaptations and modifications appearing to be necessary or expedient in consequence of the provisions of this Act, and any power of the Legislature to amend or repeal an Act of Parliament shall extend to the amendment or repeal of any such Order."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

CLAUSE 467.—(Repeals.)

5.40 p.m.

Mr. MORGAN JONES: I beg to move, in page 270, line 23, to leave out paragraph (a).
Hon. Members will know that paragraph (a) contains the declaration that although the Government propose to repeal the Government of India Act, 1919, nothing in the repealing section shall affect the Preamble of that Act. I am moving that that proviso shall be removed and I dare say hon. Members will wonder why we on this side of the House are taking this line. I have no doubt that many hon. Members who have followed these discussions have a shrewd suspicion why we are moving the omission of these lines. The Preamble to which I refer is in general terms known to all who have followed this discussion in the last two or three months. It is a Preamble which presents very generally what was deemed to be the declared policy of Parliament when it carried the Government of India Act, 1919. However appropriate that Preamble may have been in 1919, in our judgment, in the present circumstances in which we discuss this matter, the Preamble is hopelessly inadequate and very inappropriate for inclusion in this Bill. In any case, I ask the question which I have asked before: What is the value of repealing the whole of the Act of 1919, leaving suspended as it were in midair this Preamble? I asked the Attorney-General some weeks ago when we discussed this before. The Preamble leads up to certain provisions. It anticipates certain provisions in the Act. If you remove the provisions in the Act, what does the Preamble anticipate? It seems to me that it is a Preamble to nothing. It, therefore, has no meaning whatsoever except being a sort of general declaration on the part of the Government that the Preamble of 1919, though it was the Preamble to that Act, is equally acceptable as a declaration of the present policy of the Government in 1935. In order to get this matter clear to the minds of hon. Members, I will read the Preamble itself:
Whereas it is the declared policy of Parliament to provide for the increasing association of Indians in every branch of Indian administration, and for the gradual development of self-governing institutions, with a view to the progressive realisation of responsible government in British India as an integral part of the Empire:
And whereas progress in giving effect to this policy can only be achieved by successive stages, and it is expedient that substantial steps in this direction should now be taken:
And whereas the time and manner of each advance can be determined only by Parliament, upon whom responsibility lies for the
welfare and advancement of the Indian peoples:
And whereas the action of Parliament in such matters must be guided by the co-operation received from those on whom new opportunities of service will be conferred, and by the extent to which it is found that confidence can be reposed in their sense of responsibility:
And whereas concurrently with the gradual development of self-governing institutions in the Provinces of India it is expedient to give to those Provinces in provincial matters the largest measure of independence of the Government of India, which is compatible with the due discharge by the latter of its own responsibilities:
Be it therefore enacted.
That is a declaration of policy adumbrated by the Government that was in existence in 1919. The Act of 1919 might fairly have been deemed to have been the realisation of the policy therein embodied in the Preamble, but much water has flown under the bridges since then. It is one thing to say that the Preamble of 1919 was appropriate in 1919 but it is an entirely different thing to say, 16 years later, that the same Preamble to another Act is appropriate to present conditions.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT: The hon. Member is saying that it is not appropriate at present. Is there anything in the wording of the Preamble to which he takes objection, having regard to present circumstances

Mr. JONES: The hon. Member anticipates what I have to say. Why do I suggest that this Preamble is not appropriate in present circumstances 1 In the Preamble one of the vital principles laid down is that there should be co-operation, that
the action of Parliament in such matters must be guided by the co-operation received from those upon whom new opportunties of service will be conferred.
The condition foreshadowed in Subsection (4) of the Preamble is not present in the situation to-day, and that readiness to offer co-operation is not present because of certain events which have taken place since 1919 and 1920. Cooperation depends to a degree upon the psychological attitude towards a given problem, and in this matter the Government have sacrificed and are in danger of further sacrificing that willingness to co-operate on the part of the Indian people by their insistence upon the letter of the Preamble of 1919.
I said that certain events have taken place since that date. Everybody in every part of the House will agree that it is of first importance for the success either of this Measure or of any other Measure that we should be able to carry with us the hearty good will of the Indian people. Unless we can secure that good will no Parliamentary instrument which we forge can avail the Government or any one else. The Government not merely recently but constantly since 1919 have induced the Indian people, not by theobiter dictaof a particular individual or of unimportant members of the Administration, but through the mouths of distinguished and representative speakers, to anticipate that a new status would be conferred upon them through the medium of this Act of Parliament. If that be so then this Preamble is hopelessly inadequate for the needs of the present situation.
In using that language it may be said that by inference I am making a charge against the. Government. We have heard frequently the statement made that whatever declarations Ministers may have made they are in no way binding upon the Government unless they are embodied in an Act of Parliament. It is one of my complaints and contentions that this Preamble will not be acceptable as a statement of the aim of the Government by reason of the declarations of policy and intention that have been made since the Act was placed upon the Statute Book. Let me read a statement made by the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Sir J. Wardlaw-Milne) on a recent occasion in this House. He said:
No pledge given.by any Secretary of State or any Viceroy has any real legal bearing upon the matter at all. The only thing that Parliament is really bound by is the Act of 1919.
I daresay that the hon. Member was strictly within the truth when he made that statement. Parliament is not bound even by the statements of Ministers unless those statements are embodied in some statutory form. Therefore, we plead that this Preamble shall not be embodied in this Act of Parliament because in our judgment it is hopelessly inadequate for the present condition of things. Am I not entitled to complain that the Indian people have been hopelessly misled in their anticipations of the intention of this Bill? I could give the Committee a whole host of quotations,
not by unimportant people but by people speaking in a representative capacity, declaring the intentions and policy of the Government of this country. Everyone knows that the late Viceroy of India, the present President of the Board of Education, Viscount Halifax, declared that the intention of the Government was the granting of Dominion status to the people of India. That was the declaration of the Viceroy speaking officially on behalf of the Government of the day. I might summon to my support a declaration made by the right hon. Member for Epping (Mr. Churchill) when he was at a much earlier date a responsible Minister in this country. He said:
We owe India a deep debt and we look forward confidently to the days when the Indian Government and people will have assumed fully and completely their Dominion status.
I know that the right hon. Gentleman explains that statement away somewhat airily now and says that when he used the phrase "Dominion Status" he was speaking in a ceremonial sense; but in a speech delivered at Cannon Street at the beginning of this controversy he said that there could be no offence of which any public man could be more guilty and no offence which could more thoroughly be deplored than the offence of using language which could be interpreted in one sense by the people of this country and in an entirely different sense by the people of India. Therefore, he must accept some responsibility with other people for having created the belief in the minds of the Indian people that this Preamble is not in any way the sort of thing which the Government intended to do in its present legislative efforts.
I say boldly, and I see no reason why one should make any apology for saying it, that the Indian people have been encouraged to believe that the status which was going to be conferred upon them by this legislation, foreshadowed years ago, would be the status which would place them in a position of parity with the other British Dominions. Whatever powers, whatever legislative quality a Dominion Parliament should possess, those powers and that quality an Indian Parliament should possess. They should have whatever status within the Empire any other Dominion may enjoy. It is because I feel that the Preamble of 1919
does not fulfil and scarcely goes any distance towards the realisation of the pledges made so frequently by spokesmen on behalf of His Majesty's Government, either here or in India, that I move my Amendment.
It has been conceded, it was conceded a few nights ago by spokesmen of the Liberal party, that so far as we can discover there is very little indication that the present legislative proposals are being accepted with any readiness by the Indian people or by those entitled to speak on behalf of the Indian people. Whatever may be said of the merits or demerits of the Bill, it is certain that its ultimate success depends on the measure of good will on the part of the Indian people which the British Government can summon to its support. These proposals are bound to fail very substantially unless the people of India feel that they are to have a larger measure of autonomy than this Bill foreshadows. I plead very earnestly with the Government at this late hour, which is perhaps the 59th minute of the 11th hour, but I hope that it is not too late, to take some step to redeem the pledges and promises which have been so frequently and so authoritatively made. While the Bill does not give in its legislative details the status of a Dominion to India, I am sure that an alteration in the Preamble, in the sense of adumbrating a Dominion status, would go a long way towards changing the mentality of the Indian people and possibly winning, even for this Bill, a larger measure of support than now seems available for it.

6.1 p.m.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT: This subject was discussed during the Committee stage and, therefore, I assume that not many minutes are needed to deal with it now. I find myself in sympathy with a great deal of what the hon. Member has said, but I do not think that any Indian opinion will be placated by carrying the Amendment. What the hon. Member said was appropriate to the Third Reading of the Bill, but I do not think the rejection or acceptance of the Amendment will have any substantial effect in India. The Clause as it stands is the fulfilment of a pledge. On Second Reading the right hon. Gentleman the
Secretary of State drew attention to an important controversy which had arisen, and also to the emphasis placed by the Joint Committee, on the Preamble to the Act of 1919. That Preamble was a statutory expression of the announcement made in November, 1917; I suppose the most momentous announcement ever made in our Imperial history, and, because of the Preamble and the importance which was attached to it by everyone who had considered the question, the Secretary of State on 6th March, in the course of his speech in introducing the Bill, made it clear that the Preamble to the Act of 1919 would remain unrepealed. He said on two occasions he attached importance to it.
Later on when my right hon. Friend the Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel) called attention to the wording of the Bill and asked that it should be made clear, the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State rose and said that in the course of the Committee stage steps would be taken to ensure that what was a promise to the House would be carried out. Whether it was wise to make that statement does not enter into our discussion to-day, but I am sure that if the Government yielded to the Opposition and accepted the Amendment it would give rise to a great deal of uncertainty. Everyone would want to know why the promise made by the Secretary of State on the Second Reading was now withdrawn. The hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Morgan Jones) brought forward many considerations as to the way in which the Bill has been received in India, but I am sure that the carrying of the Amendment would only give rise to doubts, apprehensions and uncertainty, and the many conflicting attempts to interpret the action of the House to-day would add to our troubles. No one can allege that what we are now Attempting is inconsistent with the Preamble to the Act of 1919. The emphasis which is laid on the desirability of co-operation I should have thought was a truism, which the House can accept. Therefore, inasmuch 'as I heard the promise of the Secretary of State, the question put and the answer made with regard to this pars of the Bill, I express my appreciation of the action of the Government in carrying out the promise they made.

6.8 p.m.

Mr. ATTLEE: We have never accepted the offer of the Government 'as dealing with the point we raised as regards the intentions of the Government and the necessity of having a statement of intentions as to Dominion status. I should like to ask the Attorney-General what is the effect of a, Preamble without an Act? It seems to me to be about the same as the grin of the Cheshire cat without the cat. It may be interesting, but it does not effect anything. You have a Preamble which is a mere statement of intentions. What on earth can be the validity of that? Perhaps the Attorney-General will tell us. But let us see what the Preamble says. It is a Preamble to an Act to set up a system of dyarchy, responsibility in the Provinces and no responsibility at the Centre; and it naturally addresses itself to that form of constitution. It starts by saying:
With a view to the progressive realisation of responsible government in British India as an integral part of the Empire.
The whole point of the present Bill is that you are departing from the conception of British India and moving forward to a, united Federation of India; you have here the beginning of responsible government not only for British India but for India. The whole point is that the Princes and the Provinces in India are united. That conception is not expressed in the Preamble. It should be expressed in a preamble. If you read further on you find that in the latter part of the Preamble are considered the development in the Provinces and continuance of a government at the Centre, such as we had in the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms. The whole thing does not apply in the least to this Bill. It applies to an Act which is now being repealed. There may be a case for saying that you should not have any Preamble at all. There is a, strong case, which I believe the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Isaac Foot) supported, for having a proper Preamble, a proper statement, and for fulfilling the pledges given by the Prime Minister, the Viceroy, and many others to the peoples of India, and set that out in the Bill; but there can be no case for adding to a Bill without a, Preamble, a Preamble which belongs to an Act which is now being destroyed as a statement of further
intentions with regard to the government of India.
What is the good of keeping alive intentions which have been changed quite definitely. In the Government of India Act, 1919, Federation was not suggested. There was no suggestion of responsible government for India as a whole. British India only was mentioned. Therefore, it is really an absurdity to suggest that the retention of this obsolete Preamble is going to please the Indian people. The hon. Member for Bodmin said that it would create doubt and uncertainty if the Amendment were accepted. You do not dispel doubt and uncertainty by keeping in the Preamble. Instead of—I am bound to say—this ridiculous suggestion to keep alive the Preamble to a dead Act in order to please the Indian people, you can put in a proper Preamble which will really fulfil the pledges given to the Indian people.

6.10 p.m.

Sir B. PETO: I should like to ask one question. Some of my hon. Friends attach considerable importance to the retention of the Sub-section, but I should like to ask whether there is any precedent for the repeal of an Act and the maintenance and enforcement of its Preamble? In the second place, I want to know whether the hon. Member for Limehouse (Mr. Attlee) was right when he said that the intention of the Government is to tack on to this Bill a Preamble which belongs to another Act. I do not understand that by leaving the Preamble you tack it on to this Bill; which has no Preamble. I do not want to rely upon something which has no validity, and, therefore, I should like to ask what is the real purpose, what is the effect, which is more important, of leaving this Preamble on the Statute Book, not a Preamble to this Bill at all, but to an Act which is repealed and whether it has any operative effect whether you leave it in or not?

6.11 p.m.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I have made so many observations upon this question of the Preamble, and matters connected with it, that I almost apologise to the House for inflicting a further expression of my views upon hon. Members. The speech of the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Morgan Jones) went a great
deal beyond the mere purpose of the Amendment, namely, to repeal the Preamble. It was a speech in the nature of a general attack on the Bill as inadequate or falling short of the wishes of the Labour party as to the degree of autonomy to be conferred upon India. There is a proper time for answering those far-reaching observations. I must not be taken as accepting for a moment statements based upon quotations, one or two of which he gave, that there is no readiness in any part of India to accept the Bill. That raises questions which can be discussed at another time, and I should certainly be prepared to meet the hon. Member on that point.
So far as the repeal of the Preamble is concerned, what the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Isaac Foot) has said is undoubtedly the case. When the Bill was introduced there was nothing in it which would have prevented a repeal of the Preamble. It was, indeed, repealed together with the rest of the Act of 1919. When the Secretary of State was speaking he made observations as to the importance of the Preamble which led the right hon. Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel) to interpose. I think it is sufficient on this third occasion upon which the matter has been discussed for me to say that we desire to preserve the Preamble as a record of the intentions of Parliament; not the intentions of a party or of an individual or of a Minister, but the intentions of Parliament and, therefore, of the great British people with regard to the future of India—

Mr. ATTLEE: The present intentions?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: —the intentions of Parliament and, therefore, of the people of this country with regard to the future of India. The hon. Member interposes, asking whether I mean the present intentions. It would not be possible to answer very correctly that question in the affirmative, because the present intentions of the Government obviously cannot be expressed wholly or accurately in the Preamble to a Bill of 1919, which became the Government of India Act of that year. But it is one thing to say that a Preamble does not contain a statement of the whole of the intentions of His Majesty's Government, and it is another thing to say that it is desirable to repeal that Preamble. We are constructing, I hope, a further
stretch of a great Imperial road. The fact that we have passed a particular point at which a signpost was erected as to the end which that road was intended to reach, does not justify us, when we have passed the point, in destroying the signpost that was erected at a particular stage in that great constructive enterprise.

Mr. ATTLEE,: Here you destroy that particular road.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL,: The hon. Gentleman takes the view, which I feel sure the House as a whole does not accept, that we have destroyed the road and that the road is not going to lead anywhere. If for party purposes the hon. Gentleman cares to make that observation, I can only say that it is not likely to be helpful in that great country which I am sure he desires to serve as well as the rest of right hon. and hon. Members in this House. If he is content to take at their face value the statement which we have made from these benches as to the intention and desire of the Government, he will co-operate with us in constructing the road. He may quarrel with us as to the pace at which we are carrying out the enterprise. There are hon. Members who quarrel with us that we are proceeding too fast. I think views have been expressed that the Preamble to the Act of 1919 in some way required that the pace should be always a very measured one, which is true in a sense, but they interpret that as meaning that it should be much slower than the pace at which we are proceeding to-day. The Government do not take that view. We think that this Bill represents the exact stage in the development of the autonomy of India, if that is the right expression, which this Parliament and this country have always intended.
Let us see what the position would be if we were to repeal this Preamble. Would it not open the Government to the criticism that they were in some way going back upon the declarations that were made in that historic instrument? That is a view which obviously was taken by the right hon. Member for Darwen in debate, and I think it was the view that was expressed in other quarters. When, on the other hand, we say that we do not propose to repeal this Preamble because we wish to preserve it as an indication of what the intentions of Parliament and of
this country have been, we surely are justified in taking that course, and at the same time taking a further step which perhaps is not to be quite accurately described in the words of the Preamble. There is one statement which the hon. Gentleman did not refer to in his observations upon the Preamble. Let me read the concluding paragraphs of the Instrument of Instructions to the Governor-General, in which it is stated:
It is Our will and pleasure that Our Governor-General should so exercise the trust which we have reposed in him that the partnership between India and the United Kingdom within Our Empire may be furthered, to the end that India may attain its due place among our Dominions.
The criticism that hon. Members opposite may possibly make is that that paragraph does not contain the phrase to which they attach an almost magical value, the expression "Dominion status." I pointed out on the Second Reading that there will be found a much more accurate statement of this conception of the status of a Dominion in the operative part of the famous Balfour Declaration, than you will find in a cross-heading which gave rise to the expression "Dominion status." The due place of India among His Majesty's Dominions must be, in the very nature of the country, something not quite the same as the place, shall I say, of New Zealand or of South Africa or of the other Dominions. India is a far different proposition altogether. I have no doubt that if this Parliament represents the wishes and intentions of the British people, India will attain her due place amongst His Majesty's Dominions; but that is not to say that the problems with which she will have to deal, in the nature of external affairs or problems of defence, will be problems that will be settled in precisely the same way as those in which similar problems, if they arise at all, are settled in connection with His Majesty's other Dominions.
The British Empire is a great conception, but it is not built up by thinking of our Dominions as if they were all square edifices of precisely the same nature. India will take her due place amongst the Dominions, not because any of us was a sort of lawyer's conception of what Dominion status precisely is, but because by taking advantage of the powers and responsibilities conferred upon her by Parliament from time to time
she takes what she desires to take, her due and proper place in this great union of Dominions and of peoples who have control over their own destinies and the management of their own affairs. We certainly did not propose, once the question was raised upon the Second Reading, to repeal the Preamble to that Government of India Act which was so notable an event in the history of the relations between India and Great Britain and the Empire. I believe not only that we were right in taking that decision, but I believe it would really disappoint the genuine aspirations of right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite because it would give rise to misunderstandings in this country, and I believe in India also, if we had taken the other course.
It seems to the Government that we are much more likely to produce the impression which we genuinely desire to effect if we preserve that great instrument as a historic expression of the intentions of Great Britain at the time it was made, in connection with this Bill, which marks a further advance upon what was possible to be attained in 1919. The hon. Gentleman opposite poured a little ridicule upon a Preamble that will appear without any Act to which it is attached. That disturbs me, who am a lawyer, less than it disturbs the hon. Gentleman. As lawyers know, Preambles are sometimes treated in a curious way. I remember that the Preamble to the Naval Discipline Act was inadvertently repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, and Parliament, having noticed this, almost a generation later solemnly re-enacted that historic instrument, although it was not operative in a single word. Why did Parliament re-enact it? Not because it had any effect on the Naval Discipline Act, but because Parliament desired to enshrine permanently upon the Statute Book a notable statement of the purpose that the British Navy has played in the defence of this country. Preambles have a value much more than their mere formal words. This Preamble, we think, has a value which will speak as eloquently as it has in the past of the intentions of this country to help India to attain finally the due place amongst His Majesty's Dominions to which we hope and believe this Bill will give further assistance.

6.26 p.m.

Sir S. CRIPPS: The right hon. and learned Gentleman has given as an example, and I presume the only example, that he can produce, of the Naval Discipline Act, where Parliament re-enacted a Preamble which had inadvertently been struck out of an existing Act of Parliament. That, of course, is not the case here. There there was an operative Act to which the Preamble was attached, but here there is a device which I think is probably without precedent, that is the device of repealing a complete Act of Parliament with the exception of this Preamble. As I understand the position, this Preamble will not in any sense govern the present Bill; that is to say, it does not in any sense become part of it. It does not operate as a Preamble usually operates, for the purpose of directing the mind of the court or any person who is interpreting the Statute when there is some difficulty of interpretation.
The object of a Preamble is to lay down the general tenour of an Act, so that if there is a difficulty in interpreting the words, or some phraseology which may be doubtful, the courts can say, "Well, Parliament has told us the general tenour, and therefore we must interpret the phrase in accordance with its tenour, which is expressed." That is the purpose for which Parliament makes Preambles to Statutes. That is, of course, in some cases a wise thing, and it has been a helpful thing in the matter of interpretation. But here, when this Preamble is left, as it will be, nakedly on the Statute Book, so far as the Statute Book is concerned it will have no possible purpose or function.
The Attorney-General speaks as if the Statute Book is the only sort of history in the country. If anyone wants to go back to see some great signpost in the legislative history of this country he does not look at the Statute Book as it stands at the moment and see how much of this or that or the other Act is repealed. He goes back to the original Act and reads the full Act to see what it was that was the great signpost in the advance along the legislative path. The right hon. Gentleman is suggesting that if this Act, like many other Acts, is repealedin toto,there will disappear from the history of the country this great signpost of advance along the Indian road.
Nothing of the sort. This Preamble will still be there as part of the history of the advance but it will not be left on the Statute Book as part of the legislation applying to India. That is the difference between striking it off the Statute Book or leaving it on the Statute Book. The point is whether, when one is looking through the bundle of legislation applying to India, in force and on the Statute Book, one finds an isolated Preamble without any enacting Clauses following it, or whether one finds that that Preamble has disappeared into history where it can always be referred to as the Preamble of the original Act of 1919 as it was passed at that time.
When the right hon. and learned Gentleman refers to the signpost and suggests that we speak of the road being destroyed, I would point out that what my hon. Friend said was that a particular road was being destroyed and this road substituted for it. The whole object and force of the Preamble of the 1919 Act was to point out that British India was to become a new integral part of what was then called the Empire. The word "Empire" is, of course, no longer applicable if one is dealing with the Commonwealth of Nations. If one is dealing with the Colonial Empire the word is still applicable but if one is dealing with the Commonwealth of Nations, then, since the Statute of Westminster, the word "Empire" is no longer applicable. But this signpost to which reference has been made was an indication that British India would come in as part of that was then called the Empire. Now the Government have adopted a new entity. It is Federal India which is to come in as part of the Commonwealth of Nations. I understand that to be the purport of the passage which the right hon. and learned Gentleman read out of the Instrument of Instructions. It is not British India but "India" which is to attain her due place among the Dominions.
The effect of making a special and unexampled provision in this Bill as regards the non-repeal of this Preamble is to make people think, if they think 'anything at all about it, that the intentions expressed in this Preamble, which is left, are still the intentions of Parliament. That was why I ventured to interrupt the right hon. and learned Gentleman to ask him whether, when he used the
expression "the intentions of Parliament" he meant the present intentions of Parliament. Naturally, he said, "No." On the face of it, the Preamble does not express the present intentions of Parliament. Then, why take this exceptional step in order to keep it in the bundle of legislative documents, if admittedly it does not express the present intention either of Parliament or of the Government? It is idle to say as an excuse that if it were repealed there would be criticism on the ground that we had departed from our intentions or the Government had departed from their intentions. There is a simple way of dealing with such a criticism, and that is to insert a Preamble in the present Bill stating accurately what the present intentions are. If it is desirable, as the right hon. and learned Gentleman says, to leave great sign-posts as we proceed along this path of development, in order to mark our advance, what more appropriate moment for erecting a great sign-post on the Indian path than to-day?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: There is the Bill.

Sir S. CRIPPS: Why not 'a Preamble? If the 1919 Act is so distinguished as a sign-post by its Preamble, which, alone, is to be left, then why are not future generations to have the advantage, in the case of this Bill, of being able to point to a great Preamble as a sign-post?

The ATTORNEY - GENERAL: A moment ago the hon. and learned Gentleman said that I accepted his suggestion that the Preamble did not express the present views of His Majesty's Government. I think he misunderstood what I said. I said it expressed the intention of His Majesty's Government at the time, but within that Preamble undoubtedly lies all that which has been expressed in different ways and at different times as to the great objective of the Parliament of the United Kingdom 'and the people of this country towards India.

Sir S. CRIPPS: No, not "India."

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Never mind about British India or India—towards India. I said this on Second Reading, and I do not want to repeat it, but I do not want the hon. and learned Gentleman to leave the impression that I have suggested that the Preamble of 1919
is not adequate to, express, when it is properly set out in another Act of Parliament, the present intention of His Majesty's Government. It is all implicit in the Preamble, as I have pointed out, and it has been so explained over and over again.

Sir S. CR I PPS: I am obliged to the right hon. and learned Gentleman and naturally I do not want to misrepresent what I understood him to say. I feel certain, however, that he cannot really mean what he has just said, in this sense, that taking this Preamble as a written document and not as some vague conception, it does not foreshadow in the least any conception of Federal India. It is absolutely limited to the conception of British India becoming an integral part of the Empire. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman says that we are to attach no importance to Federation, that it is the same thing whether it is British India or Federated India—if that be the view of the Government then so be it. But to the ordinary person who looks at the development which has taken place—whether one thinks it right or wrong, whether one thinks it goes far enough or not—one of the striking features in that development is the conception in this Bill of a Federal State as against the conception of a British India which was the basis of the Act of 1919.
If I may now revert to the point with which I was dealing when the right hon. and learned Gentleman was good enough to correct me, I would say that if it be true that the objective of these Preambles is the "signpost objective," to use the right hon. and learned Gentleman's phrase, then surely the present moment is the moment when the next signpost should be erected. We ought not to go back to the last signpost. We ought to erect a new signpost clearly pointing the road along which it is intended to proceed. There are phrases in the Instrument of Instructions to which the right hon. and learned Gentleman

Division No. 230.]
AYES.
  [6.43 p.m.


Acland, Rt. Hon. Sir Francis Dyke
Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Briscoe, Capt. Richard George


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Beaumont, Hon. R.E.B. (Portsm'th,C.)
Broadbent, Colonel John


Astbury Lieut.-Com. Frederick Wolfe
Benn, Sir Arthur Shirley
Brocklebank, C. E. R.


Atholl, Duchess of
Blindell, James
Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks.,Newb'y)


Balley, Erie Alfred George
Bowyer, Capt. Sir George E. W.
Browne, Captain A. C.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Braithwaite, J. G. (Hillsborough)
Burghley, Lord

and the Government attach great importance. There is the phrase which he himself has just read. If that be a correct statement of the view of the Government to-day as to the objective of the present Bill—as it must be—why should not that statement be substituted as a Preamble for the statement of 1919 There can be, in my submission, no possible reason for preserving, as part of a Statute, as distinct from preserving it as part of history, a statement which on the face of it does not express the present intentions of Parliament.

If we leave it unrepealed we are, in effect, making a special provision which is equivalent to its re-enactment. The implication from that is that neither the country, nor the House, nor the Government has moved forward an inch since 1919, and that we desire to make it clear to the Indian people that our conception of the Indian position is exactly what it was in 1919. You could not make that clearer than by taking these special precautions to re-enact a Preamble, which then was applicable but which to-day is not applicable. We ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman, instead of adopting this curious and unprecedented procedure, to make a new Preamble for this Measure, erecting a fresh signpost and pointing out the new road along which he and the people of this country are advancing and leaving no doubt in the minds of the Indian people about the fact that there has been an advance since 1919 in the manner of looking at their problems and the problems of Indian government. By so doing he will create more confidence among them, if he desires them to assist him in supporting and carrying through this scheme which, whether one agrees with it or not, is a great scheme.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 196; Noes, 37.

Butler, Richard Austen
Hope. Capt. Hon. A. O. J. (Aston)
Rhys, Hon. Charles Arthur U.


Cadogan, Hon. Edward
Hopkinson, Austin
Rickards, George William


Campbell, Sir Edward Taswell (Brmly)
Hornby, Frank
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)


Campbell, Vice-Admiral G. (Burnley)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Ropner, Colonel L.


Campbell-Johnston, Malcolm
Inskip, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas W. H.
Rosbotham, Sir Thomas


Carver, Major William H.
Jackson, Sir Henry (Wandsworth, C.)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cayzer, Sir Charles (Chester, City)
James, Wlng-Com. A. W. H.
Rutherford, John (Edmonton)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Janner, Barnett
Salt, Edward W.


Chorlton, Alan Ernest Leofric
Jennings, Roland
Samuel, M. R. A. (W'ds'wth, Putney)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Joel, Dudley J Barnato
Sandeman, Sir A. N. Stewart


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Johnstone, Harcourt (S. Shields)
Sandys, Duncan


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D,
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Selley, Harry R.


Colville, Lieut-Colonel J.
Kerr, Lieut.-Col. Charles (Montrose)
Shaw, Helen B. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Conant, R. J. E.
Keyes, Admiral Sir Roger
Shepperson, Sir Ernest W.


Cooper, A. Dud
Kimball, Lawrence
Sinclair, Maj. Rt. Hn. Sir A.(C'thness)


Courthope, Colonel Sir George L.
Kirkpatrick, William M.
Smith, Sir Robert (Ab'd'n & K'dine.C.)


Craddock, Sir Reginald Henry
Knox, Sir Alfred
Somervell, Sir Donald


Cranborne, Viscount
Lamb, Sir Joseph Quinton
Somerville, Annesley A (Windsor)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George
Southby, Commander Archibald R. J


Crooke, J. Smedley
Leech, Dr. J. W.
Spears, Brigadier-General Edward L.


Croom-Johnson, R. p.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Spencer, Captain Richard A.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Levy, Thomas
Spens, William Patrick


Davidson, Rt. Hon. J. C. C.
Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip Cunllffe-
Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Fylde)


Davies, Edward C. (Montgomery)
Llewellyn-Jones, Frederick
Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'morland)


Dickle, John P.
Lovat-Fraser, James Alexander
Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)


Doran, Edward
Lumley, Captain Lawrence R.
Stourton, Hon. John J.


Drewe, Cedric
Mabane, William
Strauss, Edward A.


Dugdale, Captain Thomas Lionel
McCorquodals, M. S.
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton.


Dunglass, Lard
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid Hart


Eales, John Frederick
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Summersby, Charles H.


Ellis, Sir R. Geoffrey
McKle, John Hamilton
Sutcliffe, Harold


Emmott, Charles E. G. C
McLean, Major Sir Alan
Tate, Mavis Constance


Essenhigh, Reginald Clare
McLean, Dr. W. H. (Tradeston)
Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)


Evans, Capt. Arthur (Cardiff, S.)
Macquisten, Frederick Alexander
Thomson, Sir James D. W.


Evans, David Owen (Cardigan)
Mallalieu, Edward Lancelot
Thorp, Linton Theodore


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univ.)
Manningham-Suller, Lt.-Col. Sir M.
Titchfleld, Major the Marquess of


Evans, R. T. (Carmarthen)
Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.
Todd, Lt.-Col. A. J. K. (B'wick-on-T.)


Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst
Mayhew, Lieut.-Colonel John
Todd, A. L. S. (Kingswinford)


Foot, Isaac (Cornwall, Bodmin)
Mellor, Sir J. S. P.
Touche, Gordon Cosmo


Fox, Sir Gifford
Mills, Sir Frederick (Leyton, E.)
Train, John


Fraser, Captain Sir Ian
Milne, Charles
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Fremantle, Sir Francis
Mitchell, Harold P.(Br'tf'd & Chisw'k)
Wallace, Captain D. E. (Hornsey)


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Monsell, Rt. Hon. Sir B. Eyres
Wallace, Sir John (Dunfermline)


George, Megan A. Lloyd (Anglesea)
Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univer'ties)
Ward. Lt.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)


Glukckstein, Louis Halle
Munro, Patrick
Wardlaw-Mline, Sir John S.


Glyn, Major Sir Ralph G. C
Nation, Brigadier-General J. J. H.
Wedderburn, Henry James Scrymgeour


Golf, Sir Park
Nicholson, Godfrey (Morpeth)
Wells, Sydney Richard


Gower, Sir Robert
Nunn, William
White, Henry Graham


Grenfell, E. C (City of London)
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Grimston, R. V.
Patrick, Colin M.
Williams, Herbert G. (Croydon, S,)


Gritten W. G. Howard
Penny, Sir George
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir Arnold (Hertf'd)


Guinness Thomas L. E. B.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Windsor-Ctlve, Lieut.-Colonel George


Hales Harold K.
Pickering, Ernest H.
Wiss, Alfred R.


Hamilton, Sir R.W.(Orkney & Zetl'nd)
Pickthorn, K. W. M.
Withers, Sir John James


Hammersley, Samuel S.
Pybus, Sir John
Womersley, Sir Walter


Harvey, George (Lambeth,Kenningt'n)
Raikes, Henry V. A. M.
Worthington, Dr. John V.


Harvey, Major Sir Samuel (Totnes)
Ramsay, T. B. W. (Western Isles)



Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)
Ramsbotham, Herwald
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Headlam, Lieut.-Col. Cuthbert M.
Ramsden, Sir Eugene
Major George Davies and Dr.


Herbert. Capt. S. (Abbey Division)
Reed, Arthur C. (Exeter)
Morris-Jones.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Reid, William Allan (Derby)





NOES.


Adams, D. M. (Poplar, South)
Edwards, Charles
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Gardner, Benjumin Walter
McEntee, Valentine L.


Banfield, John William
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. Arthur
Milner, Major James


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts., Mansfield)
Grenfell, David Rees (Glamorgan)
Parkinson, John Allen


Buchanan, George
Groves, Thomas E.
Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, North)


Cleary, J. J.
Grundy, Thomas W.
Thorne, William James


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hall, George H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Tinker, John Joseph


Cripps, Sir Stafford
Jenkins, Sir William
West, F. R.


Dangar, George
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Williams, Edward John (Ogmore)


Davies, David L. (Pontypridd)
Lawson, John James
Wilmot, John


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Leonard, William



Davies, Stephen Owen
Logan, David Gilbert
 TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Dobble, William
Lunn, William
Mr. John and Mr. D. Graham.

Orders of the Day — FIRST SCHEDULE. —(Composition of the Federal Legislature.)

6.48 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 271, line 18, after the first "in," to insert "or prescribed under."

This paragraph deals with the qualifications for membership for the Federal Legislature, and the insertion of these words is merely to meet certain qualifications such as those, for example, included under paragraph 14 (b). It is a drafting

Amendment to bring into form the references to "prescribed" later on.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page to leave out lines 8 to 10.
In Committee the Government decided to reserve one women's seat in the Council of State for each of the Provinces named in the paragraph. The hon. Lady the Member for Wallsend (Miss Ward) moved an Amendment, which we accepted provided we could look into the drafting of it. I am by this Amendment moving to omit the words put in on the Committee stage, and in the next Amendment I shall move to insert a new paragraph to take its place. There is no change in substance in that Amendment, but we consider our drafting meets the desires which the Committee had in mind a little more accurately.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page line 27, at the end, insert:
(2) In Madras, Bombay, Bengal, the United Provinces, the Punjab, and Bihar the foregoing provisions of this paragraph shall have effect subject to such modifications as may be prescribed for securing that in the case of each of those Provinces one at least of the seats filled in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph is always held by a woman and, in that connection, for determining what male candidate, if any, who would otherwise be elected, is to be replaced by a woman."—[Mr. Butler.]

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 273, to leave out line 37.
It has been agreed that there shall be a Second Chamber in Assam, and therefore no reference to Assam needing an electoral college is required. This Amendment strikes out the line which refers to the composition of the electoral college in Assam.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 274, line 5, at the end, to insert:
and in any of the general constituencies one or more seats may be reserved for members of the scheduled castes.

This Amendment has been thought desirable, since it was probable, in the case of the Central Provinces electoral college, that the depressed classes could not gain a seat by the normal operation of the quota. I move the Amendment in
order to make this addition and to be fair to the scheduled castes.

6.52 p.m.

Mr. COCKS: Will the Under-Secretary explain how the scheduled castes will be represented as a result of this Amendment?

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: This Amendment refers to scheduled classes and a few minutes ago we were dealing with the position of women. I thought there was a little confusion in official circles, and I should like to know whether this Amendment upsets the Amendment which referred to women.

Duchess of ATHOLL: I would like, as one of the Members who pressed the Government for reserved seats for the scheduled castes on the Council of State, to express my thanks to the Government for having met us.

6.53 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: With reference to the remarks of the hon. Member for Torquay (Mr. C. Williams), I agree that these Schedules are very complicated, but I cannot agree that the Government are at fault. I would only remind the hon. Member that he himself is at fault. This Amendment deals with electoral colleges, but the previous Amendment dealt with the Upper House, and there is a difference between the Upper House and the electoral colleges. The remarks of the hon. Member for Broxtowe (Mr. Cocks) are best met if he reads consecutively the Schedule as amended. We consider that without a special reference to reservation it might not be possible for the scheduled classes to secure election.

Amendment agreed to.

6.55 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 278, line 5, to leave out "and" and to insert "or."
This and the following two Amendments refer to the definition paragraph in regard to Europeans and AngloIndians. A similar Amendment came up on the Burma Schedule, which is now the Twelfth Schedule, and the Committee decided that the word should be "or" instead of "and." It is a somewhat technical matter which was gone into at some length in Committee, and this Amendment will bring the definition in
line with what the Committee decided in the Burma Schedule. With reference to the two following Amendments, it was suggested that the word "descent" might be more appropriate than the word "race." I do not know that it makes much difference, but on consideration we think that "descent" is the better word.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 278, line 7, leave out "race," and insert "descent."—[The Solicitor-General.]

Consequential Amendment made.

7.0 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 284, line 21, after "Punjab," insert, "or the Government of Assam."
This Amendment adds to the States which are in political relations with the Government of the. Punjab the States which are in political relations with the Government of Assam. This has relation to the Khasi States which are in relation with Assam, and to which we thought reference must be made in the Schedule.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 291, line 26, column 5, leave out "2,852,197," and insert "3,032,197."

In page 291, line 34, leave out "78,801,912," and insert "78,981,912."

Orders of the Day — SECOND SCHEDULE.—(Provisions of this Act the amendment whereof is not to affect the validity of the Instrument of Accession of a State.)

7.1 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 292, line 15, after "office," to insert:
the power of the Governor-General to decide whether he is entitled to act in his discretion or exercise his individual judgment.
As the House will realise the words which appear on the right-hand part of the page in the Second Schedule describe those parts of the Bill which cannot be amended without affecting the validity of the Instruments of Accession. These words which we propose to insert are words describing in general terms the provisions of Clause 9 (3) of the Bill. This clearly is one of those matters which should fall into the right-hand half of the page. It is a matter which affects the general structure of the Federation. It was an oversight that it was omitted in the first draft.

7.1 p.m.

Mr. COCKS: Although I do not object to this Amendment, I think that the Government should have been more careful in drawing up the original Bill instead of bringing this Amendment here at the last hour on Report stage when no one really Understands what is happening. It is unfortunate that this important Amendment should be made at the last moment.

7.2 p.m.

Brigadier-General Sir HENRY CROFT: I should like to protest against what was said by the hon. Member who has just sat down. I consider that the drafting in this Bill has been one of the miracles of all Parliamentary history. When the House realises that it was impossible for the draftsmen to consider this Bill until the decision of the Joint Select Committee was reported, because everybody knew that that impartial body might come to a different conclusion at the end, it is nothing short of miraculous that this important Bill should have been drafted in a few weeks with so few errors.

7.4 p.m.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: The hon. Member for Broxtowe (Mr. Cocks) was quite unfair in the attack which he made on the Government draftsmen, who on the whole have worked in a. most efficient way. The hon. and gallant Member for Bournemouth (Sir H. Croft) rather exaggerated. There have been mistakes, but I would like to take this occasion to say that the drafting of the Bill has been remarkable.

Mr. SPEAKER: The drafting of the Bill hardly arises upon this Amendment.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: I think that the Amendment as it stands is one which we are quite justified in accepting.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 292, line 23, after "States," insert "and the rights and dignity of their Rulers."

In line 26, leave out "the provisions relating to."

In line 31, after "Governor-General," insert "in his discretion."

In line 42, leave out from the first "of," to "in," in line 43, and insert "a Chamber of the Federal Legislature."

In page 293, line 3, leave out "significance," and insert "signification."—[The Solicitor-General.]

7.8 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 293, line 23, after "for," to insert:
regulating the procedure of, and the conduct of business in, the Legislature in relation to matters where he acts in his discretion or exercises his individual judgment, and for.
The Amendment slightly amplifies the words which were in the Schedule to start with to make it clear that it includes both provisos (a) and (c) of Clause 38. That was the original intention.

7.9 p.m.

Mr. RHYS DAVI ES: I always hesitate to intervene in these matters, and I hope that the hon. and gallant Member for Bournemouth (Sir H. Croft) will not protest, but it seems to me a very extraordinary fact that first of all the Governor-General in the words of the Schedule can prohibit the discussion of or the asking of questions on any matter connected with any Indian State, and that now we are asked to proceed further and say that he may regulate the procedure and conduct of business in the Legislature.

7.10 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: On a point of Order. The fact that he has these powers has already been accepted by the House under Clause 38. The only point which arises on this Amendment is how much the descriptive words cover what has already been settled.

Mr. DAVIES: Why does the Solicitor-General want to insert any words at all if it has been made clear beforehand

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 293, line 23, after "discussion," insert "of."

In line 25, after "with," insert "or the personal conduct of the Ruler or ruling family of."

Two consequential Amendments made.

7.12 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 294, line 3, to leave out from "laws," to the end of line 4, and to insert "for a State."

This Amendment merely substitutes the power of the Federal Legislature to make laws for a State for the words in the Schedule. We have slightly altered the terminology in the earlier parts of the Bill. The Amendment brings the Schedule into line with those alterations.

7.13 p.m.

Sir B. PETO: I think that we ought to have a little more explanation of this Amendment, in view of the great importance of this Schedule to the States, because the words in the Bill would appear to be more comprehensive than the words which it is proposed to put in. I would like to hear a few words of explanation as to what is the motive of the Government and the reason why they have found out that the words in the Bill are not appropriate.

7.14 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I can set the hon. Baronet's mind at rest. The actual words in this Schedule do not affect the States at all. The words used in this Schedule are merely words descriptive of certain Clauses which the House has already passed, and the sole reason for this alteration of words is that in the Clause which is being described here, Clause 99 (1), the House decided to make the alteration. There is also a reference to paragraph (d), which has been amended on the Report stage, as the hon. Baronet would see if he had a copy of the Bill with the Report stage Amendments in. When I was speaking I was under the impression that the Amendments had been made in Committee, but they were made on Report stage, and this Amendment is moved to bring it into line with the alterations already made.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 294, line 10, leave out from "the," to the end of line 11, and insert "effect of inconsistencies."

In line 16, leave out from "matters," to the end of line 18, and insert:
as respects which the Governor-General is required to act in his discretion.

In line 35, leave out from "the," to the end of line 37, and insert:
Railway Tribunal and any matter with respect to which it has jurisdiction."—[Mr. Butler.]

7.18 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 295, line 2, to leave out "The whole Part," and to insert:
save with respect to the eligibility of Rulers and subjects of Federated States for civil Federal office.
As the House will remember, in the Bill as originally presented the Services Chapter had no reference to the States or the States' subjects. Amendments were introduced providing that the Rulers and their subjects in certain cases should be eligible for offices, and as the States are naturally concerned in the provisions which affect their subjects it is necessary to insert this Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 295, line 4, after "to," insert:
the saving for rights and obligations of the Crown in its relations with Indian States; the use of His Majesty's forces in connection with the discharge of the functions of the Crown in its said relations; and.

In line 18, leave out from "Lists," to the end of line 20, and insert:
in so far as the matters to which it relates have not been accepted by the State in question as matters with respect to which the Federal Legislature may make laws for that State."—[The Solicitor-General.]

7.20 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 295, line 27, at the end, to insert:

"Fifteenth Schedule
The whole Schedule.


Sixteenth Schedule
The whole Schedule."

This Amendment is consequential on the introduction of the two new Schedules.

Sir H. CROFT: If the alterations in the repealed Schedule are not to affect the conditions of accession to the Federation, will it not follow that future repeals will equally not have any effect; and may I also ask what would happen if any of the provisions repealed were afterwards revived

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I am not clear whether I follow the hon. and gallant Member's question, which I do not think arises on this Amendment. The only reason for this Amendment is that two new Schedules have been added
to the Bill, one relating to the provincial franchise in India and the other to the provincial franchise in Burma. He will agree that those are not Amendments with which the States are concerned, and therefore they are properly put into this Schedule, and that is all we effect by this Amendment.

Brigadier-General CLIFTON ROWN: I am afraid I may appear to be very stupid, but although there is a reference here to the 16th Schedule there is no 16th Schedule to the Bill.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: May we have an answer to that question

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: This is not, I think, in any sense confusing to those who are dealing with the matter and understand it, but when we have been making such changes as we have been there are difficulties in getting things adjusted. I am accurate in stating that the only effect of the Amendment is to deal with these two new Schedules. I apologise for the fact that I am referring to the 16th Schedule when the Bill has not at the moment a Schedule which is the 16th, but I can assure the House that what they are asked to do is all right.

Amendment agreed to.

Orders of the Day — THIRD SCHEDULE.—(Provisions as to Governor-General and Governors of Provinces.)

Amendment made: In page 296, line 23, leave out "other allowances," and insert "allowances during their terms of office."—[Sir S. Hoare.]

Orders of the Day — FIFTHSCHEDULE.—(Composition of Provincial Legislatures.)

7.24 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 298, line 29, after the first "in," to insert "or prescribed under."
This is a corresponding Amendment to the Amendment which I moved on the First Schedule.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: May I ask what this Amendment means? Corresponding to what?

Mr. BUTLER: I think I
gave the House full particulars. I said I was moving exactly the same Amendment as I moved on the First Schedule. I wish to be quite patient with the hon. Member, and I will give him an answer.

Mr. WILLIAMS: It is your job.

Mr. BUTLER: I have just said that I wished to be perfectly patient with the hon. Member. I have told the House once that I was moving an Amendment corresponding to an Amendment in the First Schedule in which we used exactly the same words. I said on that occasion that attention had been drawn to the fact that in addition to qualifications actually specified in the Bill certain qualifications are left to be prescribed. The question of dealing with them arose under the First Schedule and it arises also under the Fifth Schedule. Certain of the qualifications under the Fifth Schedule are also to be prescribed—those on page 301, paragraph 12 (a). The qualifications in the case of a seat to be filled by a woman, a European, an Indian Christian, a representative of the backward areas or backward tribes and certain other special categories are to be prescribed. There are similar entries on page 302, paragraph 17. As I had indicated that this had to be done under the Fifth Schedule as well as under the First Schedule when I moved the Amendment on the First Schedule I naturally did not repeat what I had said then, but I am glad to give the hon. Member the information.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. SPEAKER: As to the remainder of the Bill, there is a considerable number of Amendments down which I find it quite impossible to select. Hon. Members will realise that the House has, under Standing Orders, put in my hands the power to select Amendments without giving any reason whatever as to why I select or do not select, as the case may be, but I can assure hon. Members that I have taken a great deal of trouble to look into all these Amendments, and I have refused them practically all on the following grounds—that they are either incomplete in themselves or are inconsistent with other parts of the Bill which the House has already passed; that they would if they were accepted be quite unworkable; or that they have been discussed at great length in Committee. Those are the main reasons—in fact, all the reasons for the decision I have come to.

Mr. COCKS: Does that Ruling apply to every one of the Amendments on the Paper?

Mr. SPEAKER: To practically all the Amendments, but more especially to those to the Schedules. That is the part of the Bill to which there are the most Amendments.

Mr. RHYS DAVIS: I take it we are not to understand that every Amendment is debarred from being discussed?

Mr. SPEAKER: I am making reference to those Amendments which I do not select. There may be Amendments which I shall select.

7.27 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 2.99, line 22, to leave out "to be filled by," and insert "reserved for."
Certain hon. Ladies in the House who are interested in this particular subject, particularly the hon. Member for the English Universities (Miss Rathbone), have been somewhat anxious lest the original words might be taken to mean that a woman could not stand as a candidate in an ordinary constituency, and the Amendment is to make the situation plain.

Duchess of ATHOLL: As one of those who supported the hon. Member for the English Universities (Miss Rathbone), I beg to thank the Under-Secretary.

Amendment agreed to.

7.28 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, page 299, line 39, at the end, to insert:
or, if as respects any class of constituency it is so prescribed, may form one territorial constituency.
This Amendment was moved in order that we should be ready for any case in which an Indian Christian constituency, for example, covered the whole of one district as a territorial constituency. The original terms of the Bill spoke of "divided into territorial constituencies" and this Amendment is to meet the case where one constituency might cover the whole of one area.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 300, line 27, leave out "Schedule (Provisions as to Franchise," and insert "Sixth Schedule."

In page 302, line 6, at the end, insert:
or, if as respects any class of constituency it is so prescribed, may form one territorial constituency."—[Mr. Butler.]

"Assam
Not less than 21-
10
6
2
—
—
Not less than 3.


Not more than 22 -
Not more than 4."

This Table provides the figures for the composition of the Upper House which has been decided on for the Province of Assam. The House will see that the composition of this Upper House corresponds, having regard to the size of the Province, to the composition of Upper Houses in other Provinces, not less than 21 and not more than 22 members. The seats are divided between general, Mohamedan and European, as shown in the Table, and the Governor may at his discretion nominate not less than three and not more than four members.

7.31 p.m.

Mr. COCKS: I do not want to allow this proposal to pass without making a protest, on behalf of the Opposition, against the whole proposal of a second chamber for Assam.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT: The question whether or not there should be a second chamber for Assam was debated on the last occasion. Now it is simply a question of the number of members. I assume, in the communications that were made by the right hon. Gentleman with Assam, that the figures proposed have been generally approved as corresponding to those of other States in proportion to population. Is it entirely upon population that the figure has been calculated?

Mr. BUTLER: The composition of the chamber is not literally related to population, but the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Isaac Foot) may take it that this proposal corresponds, considering the size of Assam, approximately to other chambers in relation to their numbers. Amendment agreed to.

Orders of the Day — SCHEDULE.—(Provisions as to franchise.)

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 308, line 7, at the end, to insert:
12. This Schedule shall have effect as if any reference therein to an officer, noncommissioned officer, or soldier of His Majesty's regular military forces included a reference to an officer or man of any British India police force, not being an officer or man who has been dismissed or discharged from that force for disciplinary reasons.

7.30 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 305, at the end of the Table, to insert:

The Amendment fulfils an undertaking that we gave in Committee to add retired members of the police force to those who will get the franchise.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 308, line 34, after "language," to insert "or dialect."
This is to fulfil an undertaking which was given to the hon. and gallant Member for Wycombe (Sir A. Knox) that we should consider words in order to alter the definition of "language." We have compounded our original definition with that which was suggested, and have arrived at words which, I think, carry out the promise we gave on the Committee stage. The Amendment which follows this is consequential upon it.

Amendment agreed to. Further Amendments made:

In page 308, line 34, at the end, insert:
being a language or dialect in common use in some part of India.

In page 309, line 32, leave out "any," and insert "a."—[Mr. Butler.]

7.34 p.m.

Major-General Sir ALFRED KNOX: I beg to move, in page 311, line 39, after "forces," to insert:
the Indian auxiliary force, the volunteer force, or the Indian defence forces.

This is the Amendment which I moved during the Committee stage and then withdrew, because I understood that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster promised to give the suggestion favourable consideration. There is no sign of this favourable consideration in the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman specially said that he would take into consideration the possibility of giving the franchise to officers and men of the auxiliary forces.

7.35 p.m.

Duchess of ATHOLL: I beg to second the Amendment.
I understand that of the three forces mentioned in the Amendment neither the volunteer force nor the Indian Defence Force now exists. Therefore, the number of men referred to under these heads cannot be very great, and must be a diminishing number. We have to remember that the Indian auxiliary service is one in which Anglo-Indians serving on the railway have to give service. It is an obligation Which does not have to be undertaken by Indians serving on the railway, and if this service could be made a qualification for the franchise it would be a very appropriate way of recognising the valuable and loyal service which Anglo-Indians have rendered, are rendering and, we hope, will render on the railways and other services. I am very much obliged to the Government for having included retired police officers in the list of those who will be qualified, because that is very important, but having done that, the Government, by leaving out retired members of the auxiliary forces, make a definite omission, and the gap might very suitably be filled.

7.37 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: The hon. and gallant Member for Wycombe (Sir A. Knox) referred to the consideration promised by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster on the Committee stage. We have not had time to get the full information, because it necessitated inquiry not only of the Central Government of India but of Provincial Governments. We shall continue to look into the matter with the same sympathy, pending the full information, and I hope hon. Members will realise that, if it be acceptable, this Amendment will have to be made in another place.

7.38 p.m.

Sir H. CROFT: I thank the hon. Gentleman for the spirit in which he has dealt with the Amendment. May I remind him how great are the obligations which may fall upon this force, and that these obligations are not comparable with those of such forces in other countries? I think I am right in saying that there have been occasions in very serious disturbances, such as the rebellion in the Punjab, when these forces had to be mobilised at very short notice. They stand in a different category from the
forces which, one might say, are exercising the hobby of civilian defence in other parts of the Empire. I hope that the Government will give very serious consideration to this matter.

Sir A. KNOX: In view of what the Under-Secretary has said, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

7.39 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 323, line 8, to leave out "ii," and to insert "(11)."

This is to correct a printing error.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 330, line 27, to leave out "malba of a house," and to insert:
has throughout that period owned malba of a. house in the Province of not less than that value.
This is a technical Amendment which describes more clearly the position in regard to malba. The depressed classes in the rural areas of the Punjab do not normally own the sites of their houses but own the building material, And on that basis they are receiving the franchise.

Amendment agreed to.

7.40 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 334, to leave out lines 32 to 44.
It, will be remembered that the House decided that the allocation of Christian seats in Bihar shall be indirectly elected by bodies representing the Catholic and Protestant Associations in that Province. The wish has been expressed to us, in view of the similarity of the interests between certain of the Indian Christians and others in the general constituency, particularly in the Aboriginal areas, that it would be advisable to give them an opportunity of having this extra vote in the general constituency. This is a special request from the Province, and the Amendment would be very much appreciated by the Indian Christian community.

7.41 p.m.

Sir B. PETO: The Under-Secretary not long ago moved an Amendment to correct a printing error. May I point out that this Amendment ought to refer to lines 33
to 35, because otherwise we shall be leaving out words which we do not intend to leave out? I think there is a mistake.

Mr. BUTLER: It certainly appears at first sight that that is so. If it is so, we shall correct it.

Sir S. HOARE: It is all right. Amendment agreed to.

Mr. BUTLER: I beg to move, in page 343, line 18, to leave out "council," and to insert "board."

This is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Orders of the Day — SEVENTH SCUEDULE.—(Legislative Lists.)

7.42 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 357, line 14, after "areas," to insert:
(not being cantonment areas of Indian State troops).
The Amendment is intended to make clear what is intended by the expression "local self-government in cantonment areas" is a cantonment area within a State used by that State for its own State troops.

Amendment agreed to.

7.43 p.m.

Mr. EMMOTT: I beg to move, in page 358, line 17, to leave out "Port."
I think hon. Members who laugh misunderstand me. The effect of the Amendment, if it were accepted, would be to remove the limitation upon the jurisdiction of the Federal Legislature to port quarantine, so as to give to the Legislature jurisdiction in the subject of quarantine, without qualification. The reason for the Amendment is simple. It is to give to the Federal Legislature powers to prevent the spread of infectious diseases from province to province, by whatever means that may be brought about, whether by religious pilgrimages or other means. Similar power is reserved to the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and to the Government of the Union of South Africa. If this Amendment be not accepted, Federal legislation to ameliorate what are acknowledged to be appalling conditions will be extremely difficult to set in motion. The Federal Legislature will find it extremely hard to assert its
will in these matters, the seriousness of which is well-known, and the importance of which cannot possibly be exaggerated.

Sir B. PETO: I beg to second the Amendment.

7.45 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: The powers which my hon. Friend desires the Central Government to have they already have under Item 30 of the Concurrent Legislative List, on page 365, which deals with preventing the spread of infection from one district to another. That is the answer to the argument put forward, but there is a further answer. By leaving out the word "Port" here and making all matters of quarantine exclusively Federal subjects, my hon. Friend would be preventing the Provinces taking either legislative or administrative action in connection with local quarantine or the prevention of disease so far as it falls under that term. That would make the matter quite unworkable. The executive authority in this matter must, of course, remain in the Provinces, and we think it right that the special question of port quarantine should be left with them. On the particular question, on one aspect, and one aspect only, of this matter, namely, the spread of disease from one area to another, we believe that the Federal Legislature have ample powers to legislate and take administrative action in respect of that matter under Item 30.

Amendment negatived.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 358, line 21, to leave out paragraph 20, and to insert:
20. Federal railways; the regulation of all railways other than minor railways in respect of safety, maximum and minimum rates and fares, station and service terminals, interchange of traffic and the responsibility of railway administrations as carriers of goods and passengers; the regulation of minor railways in respect of safety and the responsibility of the administrations of such railways as carriers of goods and passengers.
This is consequential on the redrafted definition of Federal railways which the House has already inserted in Clause 302, and it is also consequential on the decision which the Committee has taken on redrafts made in connection with Federal control over safety. Under this Amendment, in respect of minor railways which
are otherwise Provincial and under. Provincial control, the safety and responsibility of administration of such railways is put into this exclusively Federal list.

Amendment agreed to.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 358, to leave out lines 27 to 29.
By this Amendment Item 21 in List 1, on page 358, is omitted, dealing with the
regulation and control of vessels (other than vessels propelled by sails or oars) on navigable waterways situate in more than one unit, and the rule of the road on such waterways.
That by a later Amendment, is transferred to List 3, the Concurrent List. This matter has been gone into by my right hon. Friend with the Government of India, and indeed the suggestion for this change was made, I believe, by the Bengal Government, who are particularly concerned with the control of inland waterways, and it is thought on the whole more appropriate that this matter should be in the Concurrent List, that the Provinces should be able to deal with it, but that there should be a power of the Central Legislature to have some central legislation and some common code in so far as it is found to be necessary and desirable. The next Amendment is consequential on that change, and omits words relating to inland waterways in Item 27 of List 1.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 359, line 1, leave out "by navigable waterways situate in more than one unit."—(The Solicitor-General.)

7.51 p.m.

Mr. RAI KES: I beg to move, in page 359, line 12, after "regards," to insert "production."
The object of the Amendment is to place the production of petroleum upon the Federal Legislative List. At the present time the possession, storage, and transport of petroleum are on the list, but not its production. The Chambers of Commerce, when they gave their evidence before the Joint Select Committee, very strongly pressed that they should have the production of petroleum placed upon the Federal List rather than upon
the Provincial List. They pointed out the obvious danger which there must be if the actual production of an important thing like petroleum is left to the control of Provincial Governments. After all, petroleum is an essential commodity for the defence of the Federation, and if it were merely left to the uncoordinated mercies of the Provincial Legislatures, they might use their power over petroleum for their own requirements and financial needs rather than for the good of the Federation as a whole. Therefore, I move the Amendment as one who in this matter at least is striving to make the Federation a real success, and I suggest that this particular effort to put the production of petroleum on the Federal List would at any rate assist the doubtful Federation and give it one prop by which to hold itself. I very much hope that on this, the last Amendment which I shall have the privilege of moving on this Bill, the Government will give me a pleasant but rather unexpected surprise.

7.53 p.m.

Sir H, CROFT: I beg to second the Amendment.
I think the House will appreciate the fact that we have done everything in our power to try to improve the Bill by moving Amendments of this kind. This is a subject on which the Under-Secretary of State need not feel that he is giving way and accepting Conservative principles or anything vulgar and old-fashioned like that. It is simply a question of administration, and I would remind him that it has been found in certain countries, notably in the United States of America, that it really is essential to federalise the whole of the production as well as the transportation and distribution of petroleum. I think, if we look ahead and realise how absolutely essential petrol is becoming in every walk of life, and more especially in the defence of any country, particularly of a country like India, it will be appreciated that it is supremely important that production should also come under the Federal aegis. I hope the Government will find it possible to accept the Amendment, because I think it is one of real substance and would undoubtedly make for the safety and success of the Federal Government in the future.

7.5.5 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: My hon. and gallant Friend said that he and those supporting him had moved many Amendments of this kind. He really did himself an injustice, because this Amendment proposes to do in the wrong place some-tilling which is already done in the Bill as it stands in the right place. That is the pleasant and unexpected surprise which I have for my hon. Friend the Member for South-East Essex (Mr. Raikes). If my hon. Friend looks at Item 37, a little lower down in the List, he will see—it was the result of Amendments made, I think, in Committee—that it now covers the
regulation of mines and oilfields and mineral development to the extent to which such regulation and development under Federal control is declared by Federal law to be expedient in the public interest.
I think that gives the Federal Legislature ample powers to prevent arising the difficulties which have been referred to as arising in the United States of America. This item deals with a rather different kind of matter.

Mr. RAIKES: In view of my hon. and learned Friend's explanation, I have much pleasure again in asking leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

7.59 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 359, line 16, after "including," to insert:
corporations owned or controlled by a Federated State and carrying on business only within that State or.
This is the item which deals with trading corporations. It is not intended that the Federal Legislature should have power to deal with corporations under or controlled by Federated States and carrying on business only within such States. The effect of the Amendment is that corporations which go outside one unit can come under Federal control, but if they are confined to one unit, then they cannot.

Amendment agreed to.

8.0 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 359, to leave out line 22, and to insert:
36. Regulation of labour in mines; safety in mines and oilfields.
This is an Amendment made as the result of suggestions advanced in Committee that it might be as well to have some central control in respect of safety in oilfields as in mines, and we therefore propose to redraft the item.

8.1 p.m.

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: We are very much obliged to the hon. and learned Gentleman for extending the provisions of this paragraph from the wording that appears in the original draft, and we are hoping that we may be able to push the Government a little further to-night and that they may accept the Amendment which I am about to move. Let me clarify the situation a little by saying that we have now before us three sets of words. As they appear in the original draft on page 359, number 36, it reads:
Regulation of labour and safety in mines.
The Government are now proposing to make it read:
Regulation of labour in mines: safety in mines and oilfields.
That, of course, extends the original provision. We want, however, to carry the matter a stage further and to amend it if possible to read:
Regulation of labour and safety in mines, quarries, and oilfields.
I cannot see how the Government can very well resist this proposal, because it is obvious that there must be quarries in India. I have never been there. I have read a little about India, and I shall be astonished if there are no quarries at all in that great continent. We want to link up mines and quarries in this way, because in our own country a great deal of our protective legislation in respect of workmen links up both mines and quarries. We would like the same combination to be effected in India if possible.
There is another small point but rather important to the workpeople in India. I understand that coal in some parts of India is not mined at all. It is quarried, and consequently if it is intended to protect the working conditions of the miners in India it is possible that we shall be restricting the law merely to coal miners who are working in pits, whereas I think the intention is to cover the protective interests of men who
are both mining and quarrying coal and quarrying anything else. We want, therefore, not only to secure the regulation of labour in certain respects and the safety of labour in other respects; we want to combine both, and to see that both the regulation of labour and safety in mines, quarries and oilfields shall be included in the list. We have not asked very much for the working-classes of India from the Government in this Bill. Nearly all the interests involved in this House have been satisfied in a measure by several requests made by them to the Government of the day. It would be a sad state of affairs if the last Amendment that is to be moved from the Labour benches in favour of the working-classes of India were left unheard. I think by this time the Government will have made up their mind to accept the Amendment.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Captain Bourne): The hon. Member will appreciate that we have not taken the words out of the Bill preparatory to inserting the words of the Amendment. I take it that he was speaking on the original Amendment.
Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill," put and negatived.
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, to leave out "in mines; safety in mines and oilfields," and to insert "and safety in mines, quarries, and oilfields."

8.5 p.m.

Sir H. CROFT: I rise, not in opposition to the hon. Member, but merely to congratulate him because this subject must be regarded as important. There are more representatives on the Front Bench for this Amendment than I remember seeing throughout the whole Committee. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman and hon. Gentlemen opposite combined, will be able to give due attention to the hon. Member's eloquent speech.

8.6 p.m.

Mr. KIRKPATRICK: May I join in the general harmony prevailing, and support the proposal made from the Opposition
Front Bench. Quarries are a very important feature of mining in India. There are open face seams of coal of 80 to 100 feet which are quarried. Then we have a very large indigenous stone industry, and there are large limestone quarries supplying the limestone for iron works in Bengal. This is a very reasonable proposal, because quarries are very largely worked, not by companies only, but by small industrial groups in British India and particularly in Indian India,

8.7 p.m.

Mr. COCKS: I strongly protest against the remarks of the hon. and gallant Member for Bournemouth (Sir H. Croft). If there be anything particularly offensive to say against the Government or the Conservative party he and his friends are here in full strength, but whenever there is anything to be said on behalf of the working-classes of India he and his friends are conspicuous by their absence.

Sir H. CROFT: There are only five of your party.

Mr. COCKS: Whenever there is anything to be said for the masses of India who, he says, are to be handed over to these tyrannical people and politicians, he and his friends are not here. It seems to me that the sole attitude of himself and his friends is simply to make political capital by using the masses of India as a means of attack on the Government. I take this opportunity of resenting this on behalf of hon. Members on these benches, and I think I may say on behalf of the Front Bench opposite.

8.8 p.m.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT: The assumption in this country is that quarries and mines are worked together. Our tradition has been on that line. Obviously, the conditions that apply to one would generally apply to the other, and, if that be the result of our experience in this country—that it has been found possible to combine the safety conditions relating to mines and quarries that very often are indistinguishable—I think the onus is in favour of the Amendment. The onus rests upon the Government to show that what has been adopted here all along should not apply to conditions in India. I think the Amendment is deserving of support.

8.9 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I intervene in the Debate at this stage because I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment to the proposed Amendment realised what he was doing. I say so with some diffidence, but for this reason. The effect of the Amendment to the proposed Amendment would be to prevent any of the Provinces legislating with regard to labour in quarries and oilfields, and make them exclusively Federal subjects. I do not know where I am sometimes. Hon. Gentlemen opposite have impugned indirect election. They said "You are going to keep in a Federal Centre men out of touch with the great beating heart of the people; you will get these people really undemocratic in their outlook.' In the Provinces they would like our franchise to go further. There they are in favour of direct election, and say that the people would be more in touch with those whose interests of which they put themselves forward as being the peculiar guardians. Therefore, I do not understand why it is suggested that it would be in the interests of the working classes or the particular section of them affected by oilfields and quarries, to prevent the Provinces from being able to legislate for their welfare. I do not appreciate the reason at all, because it is clear that under the general labour provisions in the Concurrent List the Centre has power to legislate in respect of labour in this and in other matters. It may be said, why do we suggest that regulation of labour and mines should be an exclusively Federal subject? There is already a code dealing with labour in mines as a central subject, and there is a central administrative staff which carries it out. We think it is desirable that that uniformity which has grown up should be preserved, and, as the subject is already a central subject, we believe that it will be kept properly up to date.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT: May I ask if the mines include quarries?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: No. That is the point to which I was coming next. The quarries will be left in the Concurrent List, and they fall in that part of my argument. I am suggesting to the House that, apart from the fact that there is already an existing body of
central legislation dealing with mines, it is really in the interests of those for whom the hon. Members opposite are putting forward their plea that it should be left in the Concurrent List, where the democratic stimulus of direct election—and here I hope for the encouraging smile of the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Isaac Foot)—can operate in stimulating legislation on these lines.

8.13 p.m.

Mr. ATTLEE: Is it clear that "welfare of labour" covers safety in quarries, because you have now put in to the Federal List "safety in mines and oilfields." Safety in quarries is left out. The heading of "Welfare of Labour" does not specifically state the question of safety. Do I understand that that is included? You also have factories mentioned. Here is a specific point of safety in a particular kind of industrial undertaking. It is not mentioned in any list at the present time.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL: I will certainly have that point looked into.

Mr. KIRKPATRICK: Is it perfectly clear that quarries do at present come under the mines inspectors? There is no possible way in which the quarries would come under a mining department.

8.14 p.m.

Sir R. CRADDOCK: I support this Amendment very warmly, because my own experience is that the making of provisions for safety in quarries is very necessary. The quarries for that purpose should be on the same lines and in the same article as mines. I had in my former division much experience of various kinds of mines and as far as I can remember now the distinction of mine and quarry was somewhat technical. It did not necessarily mean under the surface, but might include beds on the surface. At this distance of time I am not certain what the exact definition was, but in practice you may get a series of mines and quarries mixed up together, worked by the same men and inspected by the same inspectorate. Therefore, so far as safety is concerned, quarries should be included in the same list with mines.

8.15 p.m.

Mr. DAVID GRENFELL: I would like to ask the Government whether they do not consider it necessary now to insert
in this legislation provisions for the protection of quarry workers on the same lines as mine workers? These two classes of workers are interchangeable; indeed, they are the same people; and what applies to the one class must necessarily apply to the other. I wish to protest against the charge made against us by the Solicitor-General, who certainly misled the House in making it. He said that we desired that nothing should be done for the men working in mines until it was possible to move the Federal Government to provide for their protection. That is far from our desire. The Government themselves are making provision in this list for the regulation of labour and safety conditions in mines and oilfields. Are they to be accused of desiring to prevent anything from being done within the concurrent list by the Provincial Governments '? If not, we cannot be accused as the Solicitor-General accused us.
Our desire is one which I am sure the House will support. Imagine that we are dealing, not with India, but with the United States, where 48 or 49 States are federalised, with industrial conditions varying from State to State. Imagine that the Solicitor-General said that justice could not be done to the mining industry in America unless there was a Federal law to deal with labour conditions and conditions regarding safety in the industry. I am sure that that would be wrong, because I happen to know that one of the defects in the American mining law is that it originated State by State, and is a conglomeration of local provisions which are not uniform, and which sometimes are almost in conflict with one another. We desire that the Federal State in India should have the utmost possible authority, and should itself be the repository of all legal authority affecting conditions that can be made uniform in that great sub-continent. We are very anxious, now that the Indian States and British India are to be brought together in one Federation, that protection shall be given, not only to the workers in British India, but to people who may be called upon to work, and are now working, in States under the rule of native Princes. We believe that something like a uniform labour code can be brought about if that re-
sponsibility is placed at the beginning upon the Federal Parliament.
We do not desire to prevent the initiation of legislation in the Provincial Parliaments, if that be the only way in which it can be done, but we desire that the question of protection in mines and quarries—which are synonymus in India—and oilfields shall be brought is as a special subject of legislation by the Federal Parliament, believing that matters concerning the protection of the workers of that very large country should be reposed in the Federal Parliament, and that the Federal Parliament, having once assumed its responsibility for the whole of India, will knit the political conditions in that country into one coherent whole, and will greatly facilitate and expedite the bringing about of a national consciousness which will ultimately benefit both India and ourselves.

8.21 p.m.

The SOLICITOR - GENERAL: The matter of quarries has been referred to by more than one speaker. I have already said that we will look into what is really the drafting point, and, on the general question, we will certainly reconsider quarries. I will give the reasons which led us to omit them. If they were put exclusively in the Federal list, then it would only be a Federal officer who would be able to inspect any of the small stone quarries, employing one or two men each, all over the country. It is true that a great deal of coal is got out of the Provinces in India, and that there is a number of quarries which are analogous to coal mines, but, once quarries are made exclusively a Federal subject, every ordinary stone quarry, however small, will come under the care of the Federal Government only, and the House will see that there may be administrative difficulties about taking in quarries in that way.

Mr. KIRKPATRICK: Does not that apply also to mines?

The SOLICITOR - GENERAL: No. Mines are much more localised. Even where there are small mines, these are generally near to big ones, and they are very much easier to deal with from the point of view of administration. The coal mines in this country are disposed
together in districts, whereas ordinary quarries are scattered up and down every field in the country. We will certainly look into the matter, but that is the difficulty which led us to omit quarries.

8.23 p.m.

Mr. ATTLEE: Does not the Solicitor-General consider that the argument he has just used is rather a double-edged one? It is true that quarries are scattered about up and down the Indian Provincial field, but equally there are quarries and mines worked together by the same lot of people, and they cannot be distinguished. Is there not a case for reconsidering the whole question

Amendment to the proposed Amendment negatived.

Proposed words there inserted in the Bill.

8.24 p.m.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 359, line 33, at the end, to insert:
other than corporations owned or controlled by a Federated State and carrying on business only within that State.
This Amendment has for its purpose the exclusion from the purview of Federal legislation banking which is carried on by a corporation which is owned or controlled by a State and carries on business only within the State. If a State chooses to carry on, or is allowed to carry on, within its territory and under its control, a bank, that is a matter of internal administration with which there would be no justification for permitting Federal interference.

Mr. ATTLEE: I should like to thank the Government for recognising the possibility that in some of the more enlightened Indian States the policy of the Labour party with regard to banking is likely to be adopted.

Amendment agreed to.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I beg to move, in page 360, line 39, to leave out "water."
This is an Amendment which is consequential on a previous Amendment to omit the word "water," in the same context, from Clause 137.

Amendment agreed to.

8.25 p.m.

Mr. ANNESLEY SOMERVILLE: I beg to move, in page 362, to leave out line 2.
May I ask if this Amendment, and the Amendment standing in my name, on page 2510 of the Paper—in page 365, line 8, at the end, to insert—"18. Education."—are to be taken together?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Obviously, because if the present Amendment were not carried, the other Amendment would be out of order.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: India is not yet ripe for responsible government at the centre, but if there is to be responsible government at the centre let us make it as useful as possible. There was a Debate in Committee on a Clause moved by the hon. Member for Morpeth (Mr. G. Nicholson) to allow the Secretary of State to retain the right of recruitment for the teaching services in India. The Debate dealt with several aspects of education, and the hon. Member for Morpeth deprecated any idea of his saying that the educational service in India had deteriorated under Indian administration. But he envisaged the possibility of a breakdown, and therefore he advocated the retention of the power of recruitment of the teaching services in the hands of the Secretary of State. The First Commissioner of Works dealt with the Clause and made one or two very interesting statements. He said that when he was at the Colonial Office and working with the Advisory Committee on Education in the Colonies:
I endeavoured to prevent what was allowed to happen in India happening in the Colonial Empire.
As a Member of that Committee I appreciated very fully what he meant. Instead of trying to make good Indians for the last 100 years we have been making a most mistaken effort to Westernise them. The First Commissioner of Works said:
I think it was a fundamental mistake that we put all our money, all our personnel and all our effort into higher education for children of the intelligentsia, and lamentably neglected rural and primary education."—[OFFICAL REPORT, 30th April, 1935; col. 310, Vol. 301.]
He spoke of it as a tragedy to India during the last century, and that is abundantly true. It is essential that we should put at the centre a directing and
regulating force in this matter of education. There is no department of Indian national life which more requires such a directing and regulating force. It may be remembered that the Statutory Commission, in dealing with education, said:
At this moment it is wise regulation rather than fresh expansion that is needed.
What is the present state of education in India? There are several sources of information; one is the Hartog Report. The Report was considered by the Simon Commission, who recommended an inquiry and report on the state of education in India. A member of that committee was Sir George Anderson, who published last year a report on the progress of education in India from the years 1927 to 1932. He was eminently qualified to report on the matter. It was an official report. Sir William Hartog, writing in 1931, said:
India has been to a far larger extent than is generally realised responsible for her own education during many years.
It has been responsible since 1921. I hear from the benches opposite reproaches against this country because the state of literacy in India is not more favourable, but if during the last 14 years the administration of education had been more successful, there would now be a far larger proportion of literates in India qualified to exercise the franchise. The figures given in the report of the Statutory Commission are that the percentage of literates in British India 'are 14.4 of males and 2 per cent. of women. That is a serious matter. But one must admit that the difficulties in the administration of education in India are very great. There is no real compulsion to attend school, and the peasants continually withdraw their children from the schools. Therefore, there is an immense amount of wastage.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I must point out to the hon. Member that what he is now attempting to do is to move that certain education should be purely provincial in the Concurrent List. He is making a very interesting statement on education in India, but I cannot see so far that it is connected in the least with the proposed transfer.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: With all respect, what I am trying to do is to give some reason why it is necessary to have an essential direction and regulating force in education at the Centre in India, because if the Bill stands the administration of education will be altogether in the hands of the Provincial Legislatures. The effect of my Amendment, if carried, would be to establish at the centre that directing and regulating force which is spoken of by the Statutory Commission.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT: Would not the effect of the Amendment be to deprive the. Provinces of power to deal with this defect of education?

Mr. SOMERVILLE: Certainly not: I take it that when the subject is on the Concurrent List both the Provinces and the Central Legislature have power to legislate on that subject. I am not proposing that the power of legislation in the matter of education should be removed from the Provinces, but that there should be a directing force at the Centre in order to co-ordinate and regulate the whole province of education in India, which is an essential need. May I give a reason or two why this is necessary? If we look- at the progress of education, in point of numbers, during the five years which have been reported upon by Sir George Anderson, we find an immense expansion in the primary schools. The number of boys has risen from 5,500,000 to 8,000,000, and the number of girls from 1,200,000 to more than 2,000,000 and the cost has gone up by something like 45 per cent. The number of secondary schools has largely increased, and the number pupils also. The number of universities increased from five in 1916, to 18 in 1929, and the number of students from 62,000 to 105,000. Those numbers are impressive, but if we look at the quality of the education given we find facts which make us doubt whether that education is really benefitting those who attend the schools and colleges. There is wastage in the primary schools. There is also a great deal of stagnation.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member still has not conected his argument with the Concurrent List, which is the only matter before the House.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: I bow to your ruling, but I was under the impression
that I could only prove my case by giving reasons why the Centre should be given the power of regulating and directing education.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member does not appear to realise that he has not yet given a single reason.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: I began by pointing out that for the last 14 years the administration of education has been in the hands of the Provincial Governments, and what I desire to argue is that there have been great mistakes made and that the progress has not been what one would have hoped. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a department at the Centre which will counteract and remedy the defects that exist in the administration of education in the Provinces. That is the object of putting the subject on the Concurrent List to give the Centre the power to legislate on education without taking it from the Provinces. Surely, it is relevant to draw attention to the defects of the present system in order to provide a remedy. It is extremely relevant from this point of view that the number of literates in India should increase. At present the number of literates is not increasing. Sir George Anderson in his report says:
In The primary system, which, from our point of view, should be designed to produce literacy and the capacity to exercise an intelligent vote, the waste is appalling. The vast increase in numbers in the schools has produced no commensurate increase in literacy.
With regard to university and secondary education Sir George Anderson says:
The rapidly increasing number of students who throng the colleges and upper classes of high schools, many of whom are incompetent to benefit by such instruction is an illustration of unregulated waste.
These are the words of the OFFICIAL REPORT:
This causes an alarming increase in unemployment amongst the middle classes.
He further said:
Unfortunate political influences have also been rife and actual disturbance has not been uncommon.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member has not yet pointed out how this argument is relevant to the placing of this subject on the Concurrent List, and that is the sole point before the House. We are not concerned with statistics at this moment.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: I was under the impression that I was giving some reason why the present system is imperfect and why an attempt should be made to improve it by placing the subject of education on the concurrent list. If my remarks do not commend themselves to you I will conclude by saying that there is no department of national life which it is more necessary to improve and develop than that of education, but that department should be developed in the right way by a direct and controlling power at the Central Legislature.

8.40 p.m.

Duchess of ATHOLL: I beg to second the Amendment.
I am very glad to have the opportunity of doing so because, speaking from some little experience of educational administration, I attach very great importance to it, and I am glad that even at this late hour the House has an opportunity of considering it. I do not wish to enter at any length into the position of education other than to say that education is one of the only two departments transferred to Indian Ministers in 1921 which have been the subject of thorough examination by an impartial body. The other was agriculture, which was inquired into by the Royal Commission on Agriculture on India. Education was the subject of a thorough inquiry by an auxiliary committee appointed by the Statutory Commission, and the report of that Committee could hardly have drawn a more serious picture than it did. To sum it up briefly, I would say that in regard to primary education the report showed that there had been a great increase in expenditure since the transfer of the service without a, commensurate increase in literacy, a matter all important in India.
In regard to secondary and university education, the Committee said that the standards were not what they ought to be, and that in the secondary schools and universities there were many young people who were not up to the standards that those institutions sought to maintain. Therefore, it was shown that for a great deal of the expenditure on secondary education the country was not deriving full benefit, and the census figures showed what has for long been a blemish on Indian educational administration, namely, the disproportion of the amount spent on secondary and univer-
sity education compared with what was spent on primary education. In the last years before education was handed over to the Provincial Ministers the disproportion was being lessened, but between 1921 and 1931 when this has been entirely or almost entirely a provincial subject the disproportion has been increased.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT: If it is dealt with at the Centre it will be dealt with by Indians under the new Constitution in the same way as it was dealt with by Indians in the Provinces.

Duchess of ATHOLL: I am not concerned whether education is dealt with by Indians or Europeans. I realise that Indians must have a large share in the administration of education, whether Central or Provincial, but I hope that for many years to come it will be a service which will be staffed jointly so that educational administrators of experience from this country will be able to go out to India to help to guide and inform Indian Ministers and their officials. There is no proposal to have education centrally administered entirely. The proposal is to put it on the concurrent list so that there shall be brains both from the Centre and the Provinces working upon it.
Now I come to a very important point, and that is that the auxiliary committee which inquired into education expressly desired the Centre to take more power in regard to education than it had been exercising in the years since the transfer. It was their main recommendation that there should be more power to guide and advise from the Centre. They also wished the Centre to have the power to make grants for specific purposes and desired the recruitment of Europeans to be put in an unassailable position. The Statutory Commission, in effect, endorsed the recommendations of the auxiliary committee. They desired the Centre to have power to give information and advice, and to that end wished to see a revival of the bureau of information and advice which had been closed a few years before. They further said that they desired something which went beyond the mere giving of information and collection of statistics. Quite obviously,
they wished a power of guidance to be in the hands of the Central Government as well as a power to give information; and they also wished the Central Government to help the Provinces financially in recruitment for the higher personnel, which I think again implies that they endorsed the recommendations of the auxiliary committee to the effect that there should be a certain recruitment of European staff in the higher posts.
These recommendations have not been carried out: and the five-yearly Report published by the educational commissioner to the Government of India records that there has been very little progress in education, very little done to remedy the defects which were exposed by the Statutory Commission and its auxiliary committee. It seems to me that almost every page of the Report of the Educational Commissioner to the Government of India shows the need for guidance in policy from the Centre. It also shows what admirable guidance in policy could be given by the present Commissioner for Education in India. It is a most helpful and illuminating document, and it would be of great assistance to the Provinces if it were possible for the Educational Commissioner to have power to get the Provinces together and give effect to some of these recommendations. Further, the report of a committee of inquiry into the Punjab university two years ago said that a drastic reorganisation of education was required. If a drastic reorganisation of any service is necessary you must get the best brains together and get everybody moving in the same direction. If secondary education in India, and particularly university education, is to be raised, some difficult and unpopular things will have to be done. The standard of entrance to these institutions will have to be raised, and that is not at all an easy thing to do. It would be quite impossible for any one provincial Minister or any two provincial Ministers to take action of that kind unless it were taken at the same time in all provinces. Obviously, such action would be much facilitated if there were someone at the Centre who had the power to call the representatives of the Provinces together, to confer with them and give a lead.
I know that the Secretary of State will say that the Bill provides for an interprovincial council, which might be formed for education, and that the Governor-General has power to call that inter-provincial council into operation. It is plain, however, that the Provinces will be unable to take the lead themselves, and it seems to me that some expert at the Centre, should have the power to take the lead, which I feel is necessary if very difficult and unpopular action is going to be taken. I, therefore, deplore the thought that the present department of education in India, known as the Department of Education, Health and Lands, is going to cease to exist when the Bill is in full operation. Having had a little experience of the administration of education in this country as a member of a local authority and in a Government Department, I attach enormous importance to the assistance which a central department can give in helping local bodies to frame their policies wisely, spend their money in the best direction, concentrate their energies on the most important things, and help to secure a general level, or something like a general level, of efficiency. I can imagine nothing that is more important in India at the present time than that there should be drastic reforms in education, which will require great wisdom, great courage and great tact, to carry out. After all, education will be even more important in the future in India than it is to-day when the tremendous powers in this Bill are handed over.
The success of all democracies must depend on education, and it is lamentable to think that this great transfer of power should take place at a time when we have the unhappy picture of Indian education which is painted for us, and realise that the Bill is going to make impossible the very reforms which were urged by the responsible Statutory Commission and the expert committee in order to restore efficiency. From another point of view it is extremely important that no steps should be spared to restore efficiency in education. Large numbers, of young people go to secondary schools and universities who are not always of an intellectual capacity for that form of education, and large numbers of young people who come out of these colleges are
unable to find posts, and perhaps not unnaturally become discontented and are afterwards found among the forces which contribute to serious trouble in India. This is an important matter therefore from the point of view of the political development and political stability of India, and as such I urge the Government, at this eleventh hour, to consider if they cannot give the Government of India some power in regard to education by putting it into the Concurrent List.

8.52 p.m.

Mr. BUTLER: I am tempted to follow the story of Indian education which has been painted in such gloomy colours to the House by the two Members. I do not question their sincerity of purpose, but I only say this, that as a member of a Government which is trying to conduct this Bill through the House of Commons I am obliged to stick to the machinery of the Bill, and therefore I have to examine the Amendment from that point of view. The object of the Amendment is to transfer the subject of education to the first part of the Concurrent List. I have to examine whether the objects which the hon. Members have in mind 'are achieved by inserting education as item 18 to the Concurrent List, Part I. The Noble Lady, who has read more closely than I have the advice of the Joint Select Committee in regard to the Concurrent List, will have noticed particularly the reference to Clause 126, Sub-section (2), that the executive authority of the Federation in matters of control and regulation does not apply to the Concurrent List, Part I, but to Part II. Therefore, if they desire control and regulation of education their Amendment has no meaning at all, because they propose to transfer it to Part I of the Concurrent List where the Central authority has no control. In that case it would be a waste of time to pursue the discussion further, and I would only add that it is the view of the Government that education should remain a Provincial subject. It is a matter of nation-building importance in which we are convinced that Indian ministers will concern themselves. There are powers in the Bill to set up an inter-Provincial body which would help and advise the Provinces. We are confident and hopeful that this will be so in the future, and if
the long and reasoned speeches which have been made on this subject this evening are conveyed to India, I feel sure they will be studied with great interest, and if they do good the object of my hon. Friends will have been partly achieved.

8.56 p.m.

Mr. MORGAN JONES: I think that the Under-Secretary has disposed of the Amendment on the technical point that he has raised, but I would say one or two other words. While the two hon. Members who supported the Amendment were speaking, it seemed to me that they were thinking of a Province very much in terms of a county in this country. We are not discussing a small administrative area like that, but a Province that is much greater in area than our own country. Therefore, when you have granted to a Province autonomy in the matter of education, you have handed over a unit of administration which is very substantial indeed. I cannot imagine a case for transferring to a concurrent list except upon very limited ground. For instance, we in this country are very much concerned with the problem of raising the school-leaving age. We cannot do that locally because of the difficulty of boundaries and so on. There may be difficulties of that sort: there may be a case in favour of concurrent legislation for dealing with a difficulty of that sort. But it seems to me, as the Under-Secretary said, that the inter-Provincial arrangement provided for in the Bill will largely assist India to get over those difficulties.
I do not quite see, therefore, that the case in favour of transfer to the concurrent list is as strong as the hon. Members seemed to suggest. I rather felt from the beginning that the desire was to show how much the Provinces have failed in the matter of local administration in education. I do not think we are quite entitled to sit in judgment. After all, they have been at this job only some 15 years, and the figures given by the hon. Member for Windsor (Mr. A. Somerville) are ample proof that they are active in the matter and doing their best to overcome arrears which ought not to have been there.

Amendment negatived.

Amendments made: In page 362, line 5, after "railways," insert "subject to the provisions of List I with respect to such railways; municipal tramways; rope-ways;"

In line 6, leave out "List I with regard to navigable waterways situate in more than one unit," and insert" "List III with regard to such waterways."

In line 22, after "encumbered," insert "and attached."

In page 363, line 33, at the end, insert:
subject to any limitations imposed by any Act of the Federal Legislature relating to mineral development.

In page 364, line 5, at the end, insert:
51. Dues on passengers and goods carried on inland waterways. 52. Tolls.

In page 365, line 30, at the end, insert:
32. Shipping and navigation on inland waterways as regards mechanically-propelled vessels, and the rule of the road on such waterways; carriage of passengers and goods on inland waterways."—[The Attorney-General.]

Orders of the Day — TENTH SCHEDULE.—(Provision as to Governor of Burma.)

Amendment made: In page 382, line 5, leave out "other allowances," and insert" allowances during his term of office."—[Mr. Butler.]

Orders of the Day — TWELFTH SCHEDULE.—(Composition of the Burma Legislature.)

Amendments made: In page 383, line 35, after the first "in," insert "or prescribed under."

In page 385, line 1, leave out "Schedule (Provisions as to Franchise in Burma)," and insert "Thirteenth Schedule."

In page 386, line 25, leave out "race," and insert "descent."

In line 29, leave out "race," and insert "descent."

Leave out lines 31 to 40.—[Mr. Butler.]

Orders of the Day — SCHEDULE—(Provisions as to franchise in Burma.)

Amendments made: In page 389, line 40, leave out "member of the Burman Police," and insert "man of any police force in Burma."

In page 392, line 18, after "language," insert "or dialect,".

In line 18, at end, insert "being a language or dialect in common use in some part of Burma or India."—[Mr. Butler.]

Bill to be read the Third time upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 75.]

Orders of the Day — SUPERANNUATION BILL.

Read the Third time, and passed.

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY [REPORT: 29TH MAY].

Resolutions reported,

CIVIL ESTIMATES, SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1935.

CLASS V.

1. "That a sum, not exceeding.2,450,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray the charge which will come in course of payment
during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1936, for Grants to Public Assistance Authorities in England and Wales."

2. "That a sum, not exceding £945,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1936, for Grants to Public Assistance Authorities in Scotland."

Resolutions agreed to.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Sir G. Penny]

Adjourned accordingly at Six Minutes after Nine o'Clock.